Archive for February, 2013

Internal Emitters. Once More. From the Top.

February 27, 2013

The whole thrust of what I was trained to do in the Army was predicated on the fact that the film badges and dosimeters we all wore were useless at detecting alpha and which in any case could not measure internal contamination. The main potential hazard at that place at that time was a large store of radium. The actual risk came from the radium decay product radon. This decayed to a radioactive solid quickly. If radon escaped from the gas proof vault, it would coat the work area with radioactive dust like so:

(Illustration taken from with thanks) where the decay step of concern was the Ra226 > Po 218 decay chain. The transport of the gas by diffusion and draughts being the vectors of concern.

So a couple of times a day, I use a hand held scintillator and closely examine every surface in the building, including the floor.
It is expensive and time consuming to guard against internal emitters in the fashion I experienced. It is far cheaper to act in the pretense of sophisticated ignorance, as authorities now tend to do.
So how are internal emitters (such as ingested polonium in the example above) different in their effects to sources of radiation located outside of the body?
High energy beta (either Beta plus or Beta minus) give rise to Bremsstrahlung x rays when they pass through any material – the denser the material, the greater more x rays per distance travelled. See
We have to go back to 1940 to find one of the first attempts at equating internal dose (monochromatic high energy beta from injected Strontium 89) to an equivalent whole body dose of x ray.
But I will go back further, to Madame Curie and her daughter, Irene Juliot-Curie. I will then re-introduce the 1939 – 1941 work of Pecher, specifically his paper published posthumously in 1942. I will then look at what US and Western nuclear authorities did with that work. This process of examination will reveal the immense barrier internal emitters present to the safe operation of nuclear industries. The laboratory rule that sealed sources must be kept sealed and contained is not without foundation in fact, despite what TEPCO and its apologists may say. And those apologists are covered by the secrecy provisions of the US Atomic Energy Act and the similar laws of each nuclear nation . A provision which prevents a full and frank disclosure in the case of the actual nature of the primary threat off site in the case of nuclear emergency and nuclear attack or practice (as it relates to nuclear veterans and down winders.)
Madame Curie. “Marie Skłodowska-Curie, often referred to as Marie Curie, (7 November 1867 – 4 July 1934) was a Polish physicist and chemist, working mainly in France, who is famous for her pioneering research on radioactivity….Curie died in 1934 of aplastic anemia brought on by her years of exposure to radiation.”
Marie Skłodowska-Curie died at the age of 67 years. It was a lucky turn of events which allowed her to live this long. As a female in her era, she was allocated a building for her work which was in disrepair and drafty. Had this not been the case, she would have died far earlier than she did from the radon emitted by the tons of pitchblende that she worked with year in year out in her early days of discovery.
The nuclear industry has a different view of these events, best summarized by Marshall Brucer in his famous book. A book commonly used by medical students. Brucer writes: “According to pre-1980 health physics dogma, radon’s longer lived daughters are among the most hazardous of (radio) isotopes. It is never mentioned to newspapers that our population and life span have doubled since the discovery of radon. This argument is a non sequitur until coupled with other non seqs. Those who breathed the most radon for the longest time died 10 years to 20 years beyond life expancy:
Marie Curie, 67 years, Aplastic anemia.
O.Honigschmid, 66 years years, suicide.
F. Giesel, 75 years, llung cancer.
In the late 1920s no working class Joachimsthal uranium miner had lung cancer, but two thirds of the retired miners has pneumoconiosis and died of lung cancer decades above the 1920s life expectancy.
Neither radium nor X radiation was associated with deadly danger by the public until 1946 – except in overdose. And it was difficult to achieve an overdose except by professionals.” Source: Brucer, M., A Chronology of Nuclear Medicine, Vignette 1934, “(Radio) Isotopes Given to Humans are Drugs”, pp 215, 1990, Heritage Publications, Inc, St. Louis, Missioouri, USA, ISBN 0-9625674-0-X.
Brucer contradicts himself many times in regard to statements such as the above in his own book. Brucer, an employee of the AEC, “rankled” at the constraints AEC secrecy placed upon his work as a specialist in nuclear medicine. Bombastic and determined that no-one in the world would ever be afraid of the treatments offered by nuclear medicine, his work remains a potent influence both in sectors of nuclear medicine and in nuclear arms industry and nuclear power production. Countless doctors can attribute their attitude toward ionising radiation to Marshall Brucer.
Peter Alexander, London, 1957, at least as conversant and expert in his field as Brucer, provides evidence to the contrary in regard to the Joachimsthal uranium miners’ “data” presented by Brucer. The discovery of radon has nothing to do with the increase in life expectancy and population increase in the USA. Public Health measures aimed at controlling infectious disease being a primary factor in increasing life expectancy.
And this increase in life expectancy itself is credited by government to the actions of government. Sections of government consider this increase in life expectancy, as occurred in the 20th century, to be part of the social wage enjoyed by all. The bottom line of this point of view being, well, if you live beyond 40 years of age, you enjoy a bonus as a result of government intervention on your behalf. If you die of the effects of radon progeny at 67 or die at age 51 from strontium in fallout, you still have nothing to complain about. A spurious argument which press gangs the population into the Cold War rationale.
Brucer ascribes an increase in life expectancy due to radio-contamination by internal emitters quite wrongly.
But this ill humour of Brucer, so evident throughout his book, has trained doctors in this regard since 1990. And it inspires today the DOE Low Dose research project which attempts to further inculcate entire populations with the Brucer conceit.

The interactive graphs found at

reveal the average age of death in each year since 1850 to 2000. The increase life expectancy from 1880 to 1940 is constant. From 1950 until 2000 the rate of increase in life expectancy shows a consistent DECEASE. The graphs shown here are for the US population.
Such gross analysis engaged in here by Brucer ignores the fact of class. It ignores the median, ie the most common. It ignores the intact indigenous. It ignores the close in to sources of pollution. I have been awaiting the time when the trend to increased life expectancy becomes as trend line of overt deceased life expectancy.
The age of nuclear weapons testing, and of routine global fallout, in the main, ignoring the precursor shots, commenced in 1946. And the trend line contradicts Brucer. Trust Brucer to stuff up any attempt at a straight forward look at the first attempt to equate internal emitters with whole body external x. Just like him. University tavern humor and all. Quite sickening really, seeing as he, as a member of staff of the AEC, knew some of the secrets and the reality. None the less, he refused to hammer out a warning, unlike some others. He is quite perverse, and within the field of medicine, the reading of his published work without discernment, by 20 year old students in hallowed halls around the world, has created widespread receptors for the later hormesis cult which is now government sponsored and acting without much restraint in its advocacy of cheap and lethal standards for nuclear industry. Military or civilian. Even the heading of the chapter of his quoted here is malicious. If, as he attests, Radio Isotopes given to humans are drugs, what happens to the concept of the accumulating lifetime dose? For Brucer, there was always was, as his baseline, the concept of the beneficial dose. And that, I contest, cannot exist. For radiological burden accumulates throughout the life. It is most unlike a drug. One can take a valium a day for one’s whole life, and not die from respiratory arrest. Take one or two handfuls at the same time – less than 1 tablet a day life time dose of valium in this example, and the chances are one will not wake up.
The handful of days we each have however, is directly related to our total radiological insults. Unlike the valium, each radiation dose adds up. And that is why there is no such thing as a beneficial dose. Even in the depths of horror found in the fighting of disease, radiation itself becomes, as treatment method, an agent of disease. The cost /benefit ratio calculation inherent in medicine is at its most profound and tragic as people fight for prolonged life and comfort in our dying days.
It is a calculation which has NO PLACE among the healthy, exposed as a result of industry, military or civilian.
Since 1950 the globe has lived with the age which called be described as the Fallout-Phosphate-Benzene era. The first two components of triad of pollution are sources of internal emitters. The third member of the cartel is found in every petrol tank in the world. Benzene is a synergetic agent which amplifies the effects of radiation upon and within the living cell and body.
Brucer, in contradiction to himself, explains in great detail in his book, the discovery and proof of 1925 which concretely linked radium jaw disease suffered by radium dial painters with radium in the paint they used, was the seminal event which presented the American people with the proof of the harm of radiation exposure.
Brucer himself admits the press carried the story to population. His main concern was radio-phobia. The fear that, in his view, occupied the minds of many of his patients, potential or actual. Such a fear reduced his ability to treat people.
Brucer carefully describes Robley Evans work of calculating the radium painters’ radium body burden via the amount of radon on their breath. The ones with the most radon on their breath died the soonest. This is a flat contradiction within Brucer, who maintained some radium dial painters lived longer than they would have had they not been radium dial painters. Even as youg women died in their twenties from radium ingestion – the parent of radon – Brucer attempts to impose benefit to radon. Exactly in the fashion of the well documented utterances of the radium paint industry.

Spot the point that cripples Brucer, and all who follow him:

It was thus the year 1925 which cemented in the American mind the dangers of radiation. Not 1946 as claimed by Brucer. In picking this date Brucer reveals his use of the Groves device. The deception that nothing was known of these things prior to the Manhattan Project. That project, and the Presidential committees which conducted it and instructed it, were simply the Henry Fords of fission.
There results are now spread over the globe, including hot spots and the common people suffer it. Like it or not. Few radio-nuclide consumers set out to buy their contaminants. For the most part, we did not know what was in the product.
The causes of the flattened lines from 1950 coincide with routine nuclear releases, the introduction of synthetic phosphate fertilizer, loaded with polonium, sealed buildings due to air conditioning with consequent radon build up, suburban spread and in the US, a large and sudden increase in the consumption of petrol and greatly increased miles travelled by car per year. The Fallout-Phosphate-Benzene triad. Rest assured Brucer went to his grave rustling up customers by convincing people than radon was a health benefit, but it is not.
Irene Joliot-Curieène_Joliot-Curie
“Irène Joliot-Curie (12 September 1897 – 17 March 1956) was a French scientist, the daughter of Marie Skłodowska-Curie and Pierre Curie and the wife of Frédéric Joliot-Curie. Jointly with her husband, Joliot-Curie was awarded the Nobel Prize for chemistry in 1935 for their discovery of artificial radioactivity. This made the Curies the family with most Nobel laureates to date.[1] Both children of the Joliot-Curies, Hélène and Pierre, are also esteemed scientists.[2]“
“The years of working so closely with such deadly materials finally caught up with Joliot-Curie and she was diagnosed with leukemia. She had been accidentally exposed to polonium when a sealed capsule of the element exploded on her laboratory bench in 1946. Treatment with antibiotics and a series of operations did relieve her suffering temporarily but her condition continued to deteriorate. Despite this Joliot-Curie continued to work and in 1955 drew up plans for new physics laboratories at the Universitie d’Orsay, South of Paris.”
See also :
So far nothing I have found has shown my Army Captain to have been wrong. 
Jack, that period of the graphs from 1950 to 1970 is most interesting. Compared to the decade 70 – 80. Then, from 1980 on, the fallout age slope recommences and continues. There seems to be a pause between the last of the atmospheric bombs and the emptying of the stratospheric sink.
Charles Pecher and Strontium 89
The early part of the blog contains the story of Dr Charles Pecher.
The following link contains scanned images from papers written by Pecher and pubished in a learned journal in the period from 1939. Most important is the information contained in these papers describing the movement of radio strontium across biological membranes, its storage within bone and its movement from bone to fetus and milk via the mother’s circulatory system and soft tissue :
Pecher’s interest in radio strontium stemmed from his original interest in the role of calcium ions in the function of the human nervous system. This formed the basis of his research as a student in Belgium. On graduating, he moved, at the invitation of Ernest Lawrence, to Harvard, were he worked on the problem of lactic acid build up in muscles, using radio active tracers. From there, in 1939, he arrived at Lawrence’s University of California Berkley “rad lab”, which was equipped with a cyclotron, and which had, since the discovery of the neutron in 1932, been producing artificial radio nuclides for use in experimental medicine. Iodine 131 (Seaborg, Hamilton) and Phosphorous 32 (John Lawrence and L.A. Erf) had been successfully used in medicine prior to Pecher’s arrived.
As no form of radio calcium was sufficiently penetrating to act as a tracer, Pecher has sought out radio active calcium analogues for use in tracer experiments. He settled upon the calcium analogue Strontium 89 and had arrived in the USA armed with a method of synthesizing the material (using the method identified earlier by Stewart, Lawson and Cork.) via cyclotron.
It was a grant from a medical foundation interested in improving infant and child nutrition that enabled Pecher to conduct experiments aimed at measuring the effect of various methods of increasing the nutrition of cows milk. Sr89 was the tracer element used. The aim was to measure the effect of changes to the cows’ diet upon its nutritional value.
The published report showed that Sr89 was a successful calcium analogue and that, using Dr Libby’s wall counter (a type of radiation detector), Pecher and Erf were able to track and measure the movement of Sr89 (radio strontium 89) through the cows’ bodies, despite the animals’ large bulk. The cows were measurably hot as was their milk.
It bears pointing out that though this experiment took place after Hahn et al’s description of uranium fission (December 1938) was published in 1939, there was little clue that strontium 89 would later (in fact in 1941) be identified as a fission product and would therefore be a component of nuclear fallout. (Strontium had been detected by Hahn in 1938 and 1939. Mietner had described the fission processes by which Strontium 90 was formed in 1939. Thus while what Pecher was doing with Sr89 could likely be seen to be of interest to the military in terms of biochemistry for radio strontium generally, in terms of the tissue insulted, that weaponisation was not Pecher’s interest per se. His motivation was medical, not military.)
In his quest to understand the usefulness of Sr89 as a calcium analogue tracer (needed for both his work on the human nervous system and in his calcium nutrition studies) Pecher had to determine the biochemistry of radio strontium. So it was that Pecher injected pregnant rodents with Sr89 salts, and watched the result. He found that “the offspring were more radioactive than the mothers”. He found that orphaned suckling rats, when nursed by radioactive mothers (his words) became, also, radioactive.
These publications seemed innocent at the time. But, a few years later, the papers carried an immense amount of importance, such that any mention of Pecher’s work was classified secret by the AEC. (Hamilton, 1954.) Even as the AEC undertook a nation wide person hunt for the survivors of Pecher’s human trials……
(It is clear that Barry Commoner was aware of the Pecher Papers by the mid 1950s. It is clear that Dr Marston, that biologist – champion opponent of fallout in Australia – was aware of the Pecher papers. They arrived at Adelaide University in each year of their publication from 1939 to 1942. That is what the Adelaide University Library record shows. And from that record, I found them too. Had I attempted the same in 1954, my way would have been blocked. You had to be eligible to enter the University’s Barr Smith Library at that time. It was knowledge reserved for the elite back then. In the 2000s, my status in society no longer barred my entry into the hallowed vaults of the university library. By that time it had been 3 decades since I had spent time on my hands and knees scanning the RADIAC floor for hot particles with a military scintillator. Three decades since I had learned in military lectures of the substances which would continue to rain upon the earth for years from the stratospheric sink which held the poisons from the bombs. (and you can see that period in the blip in the graphs above.) Being born in the operational cusp between the bombs and the reactors, how could I forget this stuff. I was busy in the Army largely because the French persisted in testing nuclear weapons in the air. And the nation maintained a Radiac defence against radiological release or attack, which in October 1973 seemed to be an imminent possibility. (Though later diminished by Kissinger, the placing of US Forces in a high state of readiness for nuclear attack at the time was more than merely noted in the place where I worked. )
Disasters have happened with effects denied. One cannot normalize nuclear pollution if it’s true nature were known. The key to my understanding lay in the proofs written in the atomic age, before the nuclear era was foisted upon the world in 1945. And Pecher worked and wrote in the atomic age. Without a thought about global and local poisoning entering his head. He was the only person in the world synthesizing Strontium 89 in medical amounts in the period 1939 to 1941.
What he wrote and published was not censored in the context of war. That would not commence until December 1942. (Smyth)
Ironically, his final paper, the most encompassing one, was in fact nearly suppressed by the US censors in 1942. It was the bombastic opposition of Brucer which got the paper passed the censors and into print. The University of California advertised it in the scientific press at that time.
“Pecher originated the use of Sr89 as a cancer treatment. In 1939 Pecher had observed the uptake of Sr89 by bone tumours in animals. [14]
He found when given to such animals, Sr89 was concentrated at the tumour
 sites by the metabolism of bone tumours. As a result these tumours shrank under the intense beta irradiation of the now concentrated Sr89. Useful periods of treatment per dose were obtained due to the physical half life of Sr89. [15]
Such was the progress of the animal trials that by 1940 the treatment of
human patients suffering secondary bone cancer was underway. Prior to
treatment patients were confined to bed by great pain beyond the reach of other treatments. Administration of Sr89 chloride by injection produced such pain relief that some patients were able to leave their beds and walk. One patient returned to work as a teacher. Sadly though, despite the pain relief, Sr89 was not a cure. The trial was in an early phase and incomplete. [16]
Glasoe and Steigman identified Strontium 89 as a uranium fission product in 1940. Their paper “Radioactive Products from Gases Produced In Uranium Fission” was published in “The Physical Review”, Vol 58, No.1, 1 July, 1940.
Identifying and defining the Sr89 creation chain as Uranium + Neutron =
Energy plus Krypton 89 > Rubidium 89 > Strontium 89 with a 51 day half life, > Yttrium 89 (stable), they contrast this with the non fission means used earlier to create Strontium 89 via cyclotron by Stewart et al as followed by Pecher. (That is by the bombardment of a lighter isotope of Strontium with deuterons and protons (d, p), to create Sr89).
As the fission of both plutonium and uranium produce Strontium 89, [17] the Pecher data appears to be of great value in terms of predicting the effects of exposure to reactor emissions and fallout from atomic bombs.
 Dr Pecher’s final paper, the report on the Strontium 89 cancer treatment, was written in 1941 and published posthumously in 1942: “Pecher, C., “Biological Investigations with Radioactive Calcium and Strontium, Preliminary Report the Use of Radioactive Strontium in the Treatment of Metastatic Bone Cancer”, Contributed from the Radiation Laboratory of the University of California, Berkeley, University of California Publications in Pharmacology. Editors: C.D. Leake, G. A. Alles, T.C. Daniels, M.H. Soley. Volume 2 No 11, pp. 117-150, plates 6-9, 3 figures in text. Submitted by Editors July 21, 1942,
Issued October 23, 1942, University of California Press, Berkeley, Cambridge University Press, London, England. Prefatory note by C.D. Leake, editor.”
The work of Charles Pecher defined the metabolic and radiobiological nature of Strontium 89 and its use in an innovative medical treatment in an era of global war.
Pecher demonstrated that the absorption and retention of Radio Strontium
 was related to dietary calcium and to the calcium demand experienced by
 individual test animals. Rodents deprived of dietary calcium absorbed and retained greater amounts of Sr89 introduced into their food. [18]
Irradiation of bone marrow by beta radiation emitted from medicinal Sr89 
resident in bone presented as a limiting factor in the course of Pecher’s human treatment trials.
Of this Pecher wrote: “the problem has been studied with respect to: (1) the distribution of irradiation after the administration of radioactive strontium, (2) the method of administration of radio-strontium, (3) the chemical toxicity of strontium on the tissues, (4) the effect of radioactive strontium on the tissues, and (5) the dosage of the substance.” [19] “ The effect of radio – strontium has
 been studied in mice, rabbits, and human beings…..Under the treatment of large doses of radioactive strontium (59 to 200 microcuries) to mice, a definite leucopenia has been observed. Two weeks after the administration of approximately 180 microcuries to each of five mice, their average white cell count was 4200 cells per cm., whereas the normal value for mice is approximately 14,000. Nevertheless, the effect on the blood picture is much smaller than that of a similar amount of radio-phosphorus.
Some transitory leucopenia and anemia observed in a patient with metastaticprostate carcinoma and in another………… (Ed note: I have deleted the account of the death of a patient from the effects of strontium 89 here) after a total administration of 8 and 5 millicuries of radio-strontium, respectively, must be attributed to the treatment….Dosage: The dosage of radio-strontium when administered
 therapeutically is still a difficult and largely empirical problem. The idea has been to give as much strontium as possible without producing any serious damage to the marrow… Important information has been given by the radioactivity determination on the tissues of an adult female who died 3 days after the intravenous injection of a simple dose of 0.3 millicurie of Sr lactate (170mgm. Sr, August 19, 1940). The activity of the bones ranges from 0.05 to 0.15 microcuries per gram wet weight….Similar values were observed in a patient with multiple myeloma who died two months after receiving 1.7 millicuries of radio-strontium per gram of tissue in one day gives approximately the same ionisation as a dose of 37 r of X rays, according to Dr. Aebersold, we may calculate that the total dose given to the bones if no Sr
 was eliminated from the skeleton would be equivalent to 500 to 1,500 r. These values are obviously much too high since strontium is continuously eliminated from the skeleton, as is evident from the other autopsy data. We may assume that an amount of radiation equivalent to 200 to 600 r is given to the bony tissues when 1 millicurie of Sr is intravenously injected in an adult. This rough calculation is only interesting as an indication of the order of the magnitude of the dose of radio-strontium that should be necessary to obtain a therapeutic effect on bone tumours. ” End Quote. [20]
The attempt to equate the dose received from Sr89 as an internal emitter to an external dose from X rays by Aebersold is important and historic. It is apparent the estimate is the result of a comparison of the known effects of external X radiation doses and the observed effects of internal Sr89 as it irradiated target tissue, the equivalence taking into account such complexities as ionising effectiveness and local vs. whole body dose when comparing internal Beta radiation in bone with external X ray. The external equivalent dose arrived at by Aebersold demonstrates the effectiveness of internal Sr89 as a vector for delivery of radiation doses to specific local tissue compared to external X ray in treatment.
Was there an aspect of the work which might arouse military interest in
relation to the spread of this substance over enemy positions by any
means?” end quote. Source: “Medicine and the Bomb, Deceptions from Trinity to Maralinga”, Langley, P.J., Port Willunga, South Australia.
Copyright: 11 May 2009. ISBN: 978-0-646-51823-7
[1] a. Lawrence, J., Obituary to Charles Pecher, “Science”, Vol 94, No. 2449, 5 Dec 1941, pp. 53. Brucer gives 1939 as the date Charles Pecher arrived the Crocker Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley.
b. Pecher, C., Fwd Lawrence, J., “Biological Investigations With Radio
Calcium and Radio Strontium”, 11899 Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. & Med., Vol 46
Jan -April 1941. c. Brucer, pp. 222.
d. “Cyclotron for Cancer”, Time magazine, 28 Nov. 1938)
[2] Pecher, C., Fwd Lawrence, J., “Biological Investigations With Radio
Calcium and Radio Strontium”, 11899 Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. & Med., Vol 46
Jan -April 1941, pp 86.
[3] Pecher, C., “A Long Lived Isotope of Yttrium”, Phys. Rev. 58, Issue 9, Nov 1940, pp. 843.
[4] US Patent Office, Patent Number 2,302,470, “Material and Method for
Radiography”, Charles Pecher, Berkeley, assignor to Research Corporation, New York. Application May 14, 1941. Serial Number No. 393,416.
[5] Erf, L.A., Pecher, C.,Proc. “Secretion of Radio-Strontium in Milk of Two Cows Following Intravenous Administration”, Soc. Exp Biol. & Med. Vol 45, Oct-Dec 1940, 11825P, pp. 762-764.
[6] ibid.
[7] ibid, pp 763. Note: The energy level of the Beta emissions from Sr89 is given in this text as “750,000 electron volts”. This is in error. Pecher gives the correct value as : “1.5 million electron volt beta-particles” in the text of
“Biological Investigations with Radioactive Calcium and Strontium”, pp. 86, which was published as paper 11899, Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. & Med. Vol. 46, Jan-April 1941.
[8] G. N. Glasoe (Columbia University, New York, New York), J. Steigman
(College of the City of New York, New York, New York Pupin Physics
Laboratories, Columbia University), “Radioactive Products from Gases
Produced in Uranium Fission”, Phys. Rev. Vol. 58, Issue 1, 1 – 6 (1 July 1940, paper submitted 13 May 1940) (APS PROLA). pp 4 & 5. The authors describe a 51 day half life and denote the isolated Strontium radioisotope as Strontium 89 citing the earlier work of Stewart, (Physics Review 56, 629 (1939) and Dubridge and Marshall, (Physics Review 56, 706 (1939); 57, 348, (1939).
[9] The US ADTSR “Toxicological Profile of Strontium” gives the energy of beta radiation emitted by Sr89 as 1.495 Million electron Volts (MeV). The half life of Sr89 is given as 51 days by this authority. (ADTSR, Toxicological Profile of Strontium, Chapter 4, CHEMICAL, PHYSICAL, and RADIOLOGICAL INFORMATION, Table 4-3 Percent Natural Occurrence and Radioactive Properties of Isotopes of Strontium, pp 196. ADTSR supplied pdf document TP159-c4.)
[10] a. Lawrence, J., Obituary to Charles Pecher, “Science”, Vol 94, No. 2449, 5 Dec 1941, pp. 53.
b. Brucer, M., “A Chronology of Nuclear Medicine”, ISNB0-9625674-0-X,
Heritage Publications In St Louis, pp. 229.
[11] Erf, L.A., Pecher, C., “ Secretion of Radio-Strontium in Milk of Two Cows Following Intravenous Administration”, Proc. Soc. Exp Biol. & Med. Vol 45, Oct-Dec 1940, 11825P, pp. 762-764.
[12] Pecher, C., Pecher, J., “Radio-Calcium and Radio-Strontium Metabolism in Pregnant Mice”, Proc. Soc. Exp Biol. & Med. Vol 46, Jan -April 1941, 11900, pp.92.
[13] ibid. pp. 91-94.
[14] “Historical Timeline, Important Moments in the History of Nuclear
Medicine”, Society of Nuclear Medicine Resource Centre.
[15] Pecher, C., “Biological Investigations with Radioactive Calcium
and Strontium, Preliminary Report on the Use of Radioactive Strontium in the Treatment of Metastatic Bone Cancer”, Contributed from the Radiation
Laboratory of the University of California, Berkeley University of California Publications in Pharmacology. Editor: C. D. Leake, G.A. Alles, T.C. Daniels, M.H. Soley. Volume 2 No 11, pp. 117-150, plates 6-9, 3 figures in text. Submitted by Editors July 21, 1942, Issued October 23, 1942, University of California Press, Berkeley, Cambridge University Press, London, England. Prefatory note by C.D. Leake, editor.)
[16] ibid.
[17] “Evaluation of Radioactive Fallout” , Armed Forces Special Weapons
Project, Washington DC. 1955. AFSWP-978 (Extracted). Prepared for
Defence Nuclear Agency, Washington, DC 20305, 15 May 1981 HRE- 0808,
pp 7, “Physical Aspects of the Fallout Problem”, Table, “Comparison of Yield Mass Curves for Fission of U235, U238 and Pu 239, Fission Yields for Fission of Pu 239 with Fast Neutrons, discussion to pp 9.]
[18] Pecher, C., “Biological Investigations with Radioactive Calcium
and Strontium, Preliminary Report on the Use of Radioactive Strontium in the Treatment of Metastatic Bone Cancer”, Contributed from the Radiation
Laboratory of the University of California, Berkeley University of California Publications in Pharmacology. Editor: C. D. Leake, G.A. Alles, T.C. Daniels, M.H. Soley. Volume 2 No 11, pp. 117-150, plates 6-9, 3 figures in text. Submitted by Editors July 21, 1942, Issued October 23, 1942, University of California Press, Berkeley, Cambridge University Press, London, England. Prefatory note by C.D. Leake, editor.) pp 133.
[19] ibid. Appendix pp 135.
[20] ibid. pp 136 – 138.
[21] Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments (ACHRE) Final
Report, pp. 518, 1995, US Government. See also Staff Memorandum,
ACHRE 28/6/94, Historical Background, “Rad Warfare & Human
Experiments”, Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, U.S.
Department of Energy.
[22] Brucer, pp. 229
[23] The cyclotron operates by way of particle acceleration via magnetic fields.
See Brucer, pp. 209.
[24] Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR)
Table 4-3. Percent Natural Occurrence and Radioactive Properties
of Isotopes of Strontium, pp 196 TP159-c4.pdf
[25] Greene Shepherd, “Types of Radiation: Basic Theory explained for the nonphysicist”, Chapter 13, pp 138, “Medical Response to Terrorism:
Preparedness and Clinical Practice”
By Daniel C. Keyes, Jonathan L. Burstein, Richard B Schwartz, Raymond E
Swienton Edition: 2, illustrated. Published by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2004. ISBN 0781749867, 9780781749862
[26] Moss, W., Eckhardt, R., “The Human Plutonium Injection Experiments”, Los Alamos Science, Number 23, 1995, pp. 179.
27] Lawrence, J., Obituary to Charles Pecher, Science, 5 December, 1941,
Vol 94, Issue 2449, pp 533
28] Oral History of Dr. Patricia Wallace Durbin, Ph.D. Conducted November
11, 1994. United States Department of Energy Office of Human Radiation
[29] Brucer, M., “A Chronology of Nuclear Medicine”, ISNB0-9625674-0-X,
HeritagePublications In St Louis, pp. 229.
[30] Science, Supplement, Vol. 94, No. 2442, 17 Oct. 1941, pp 8. (Pecher is credited later in the article.)
[31] ibid.
[32] Leake, C.D., “How I Am”, Annual Review of Pharmacology and
Toxicology, Vol 16, 1976, pp 7 – 9.
[33] Scott, K.G., Hughes, Sally Smith, “ Radioisotope Research in medicine:
oral history transcript/ 1979 (c1986), Berkley, Calif. : University of California. 1986. Bancroft Library, History of Science and Technology Program.
[34] Pecher, C., “Biological Investigations with Radioactive Calcium
and Strontium, Preliminary Report on the Use of Radioactive Strontium in the Treatment of Metastatic Bone Cancer”, Contributed from the Radiation
Laboratory of the University of California, Berkeley University of California Publications in Pharmacology. Editor: C. D. Leake, G.A. Alles, T.C. Daniels, Submitted by Editors July 21, 1942, Issued October 23, 1942, University of California Press, Berkeley, Cambridge University Press, London, England. Prefatory note by C.D. Leake, editor.).
[35] DOE Openness: Human Radiation Experiments: Roadmap to the Project
ACHRE Report Chapter 5, “Experiments With Plutonium, Uranium, and
Polonium”, The California Experiments, footnote 75.
[36] Hamilton, J.G., “Metabolism of Fission Products, Progress Report for Period Ending April 15, 1944”, declassified 1947, re-issued by US Atomic Energy Commission, MDDC -1001, Argonne National Laboratory,
Conclusions, pp 26.
[37] a. DOE Openness: Human Radiation Experiments: Roadmap to the
Project ACHRE Report Chapter 6: General Benefits of Radioisotope
Research Footnote 96.
b. GE Healthcare, Canada, ]
[38] DOE Openness: Human Radiation Experiments: Roadmap to the
Project ACHRE Report Chapter 6, “The AEC Program of Radioisotope
Distribution”, General Benefits of Radioisotope Research, sentence number 1.
When I first started posting Pecher’s work and my summaries of it on this blog, pro-nuclear advocates contacted me and basically accused me of making the stuff up. It was not at their local libraries you see. And therefore, I must be delusional.
People, sadly, from 1945 until 1973 had as much hope of reading Pecher’s work at their local libraries as they did of hearing it recited on a day time soap opera.
However, I am pleased to advise that the publisher of Pecher’s 1940s work now has listed the his work online:
The salient point made by Pecher is this: “We may assume that an amount of radiation equivalent to 200 to 600 r is given to the bony tissues when 1 millicurie of Sr is intravenously injected in an adult. This rough calculation is only interesting as an indication of the order of the magnitude of the dose of radio-strontium that should be necessary to obtain a therapeutic effect on bone tumours. ” End Quote. [20] Charles Pecher, 1941.
I ask again, for the 1,000th time, to all those pro hormesis cultists out there: What is the beneficial dose of Strontium 89?
For the healthy, there isn’t one is there?
From 1945 until 1973 the work of Pecher was suppressed.
In 1940 the pain of bone cancer, being what it is, was intractable and untreatable. It caused immense suffering in the final stages of breast and prostate cancer.
Pecher’s treatment was the first to end the agony in the final stages of the disease.
It was approved for use in medicine in 1993 by the US FDA (a bit earlier in Canada.) (Lucky you Ray M.)
I ask this of nuclear authorities: Why did it take the accidental re-discovery by Dr Furisian in Germany in the early 1970s to make the US nuke vaults cough up the data it had held since 1939? Every person who suffered death with agony from the disease pain successfully treated in 1941 in the years 1945 to 1993 suffered needlessly. Because the nuclear establishment sat on a treatment which proved the harm of internal emitters to the healthy. The FDA approval carries the caveat that Sr89 Cl (the injectable salt) only be used in end stage disease where the diagnosis is confirmed and sure. There is caution against its use in the case of pregnant and nursing females.
1945 to 1993 is a long time period in which medicine suffered suppression. In order to prevent the awareness of the radiobiology of a substance created by nuclear fission at four times the rate of Strontium 90 per kilogram of fission fuel from being broadcast.
The suppression appears to have committed in order to inculcate the population of the world into thinking of fallout in terms of a risk present only in the distant future. Whereas, in terms of immediate dose, the contribution of Sr89 is immense.
It has been shown that the largest single contributor to the Beta burn lesions suffered by the Marshall Islanders was Strontium 89. This was found by Cronkite to be “at the tolerance level” for that substance. (Cronkite, AEC/USN, Congressional Record, 1957, 1959). Where did the AEC get the tolerance dose of Sr89 from? The graveyards of the Marshall Isands attest to the fact that the doses required to treat end stage disease are inappropriate as any guide to acceptable or safe dose for the healthy. Such doses cause illness and death over years and decades.
The easing of pain in the last months of life in the pursuit of nuclear medicine is rapidly becoming an activity based upon the nuclear dog chasing it’s tail. The more fallout there is the more medicine will need Sr89 Cl as a treatment. This situation was compounded decades ago when the Manhattan Project took sole responsibility for the production and distribution of medical radio isotopes after World War 2. As part of the deal, it actively suppressed the use of cyclotrons and other beam accelerators as a means of production and insisted that it alone produce the radio isotopes via nuclear reactors. The risk to health posed by reactors and fallout was hidden and the means of achieving a comfortable death promoted via a nuclear medical regime which suppressed in the fact a major therapy because the medical datasheet described the most abundant strontium isotope generated by nuclear fission and which is thus a major component of nuclear fallout.
The speed and reliability with which Sr89 produces disease in test animals is breath taking. The results from Sr90 injection animal trials were used by the AEC to promote the safety of nuclear weapons tests, whereas in fact, both the pre war Sr89 data from Pecher and the modern GE sourced Sr89 data show in fact the opposite. And it must be said, the GE data is presented in a manner which is divorced from the pre war source. Pecher showed that Sr89 is excreted in the milk of all mammalian species he tested. And he found that the babies “became more radioactive than the mother”. GE reports merely that excretion of Sr89 in milk might be expected but had not been tested. Hence the caveat against subjecting pregnant and nursing women to the substance.
I guess in that regard, in respect to the original data, nuclear authorities around, including today, the Japanese government and its nuclear buddies, simply cannot read as they herd humans back into fallout zones and steam clean radio nuclides further into roof tiles and concrete of the houses where babies live.
Among the radio-condiments we breath and eat and drink, there is a special medicine they say is safe, but is not. And Sr89 is not the only one.
Dr Patricia Wallace Durbin worked at the old Crocker lab at UC B long after the death of Pecher. She was a Project Sunshine scientist involved the Sr90 trials. Beagles and monkeys were injected with the stuff over many years. So much Beagle shit was collected it had to be stored at Hanford until it was safe to flush.
In the final stages of her career she was still busy collating and examining the data. Then the US DOE pulled her funding. In retirement she continued collating and examining the data , unpaid, until she became ill. She passed away fairly recently.
Even though the data had not been fully finalised, the DOE had proclaimed the safety of nuclear fallout. Based on the results of the Sr90 studies.
Patricia’s oral history can be read here:
One of the most important quotes from this oral history is this:

“FISHER: We’re changing the topic just a little now. Considering this work and the work [during] your career, [and remembering] the conference [on internal dosimetry research needs] that was held in Atlanta, organized by CIRRPC,29 what do you think the future research directions of the Department of Energy and radionuclide metabolism and biological effects should be?

DURBIN: I’m not convinced that the present research agenda at OHER30 considers radionuclide metabolism and biological effects as an agenda item at all. I’m not even sure it’s on their list; it’s fallen off the bottom of the list, if it were on the list.
CAPUTO: Should it be on the list?
DURBIN: I think so. I think that it’s part of an ongoing obligation, as part of an ongoing compact with the public. This is an area where the U.S. was once the unchallenged leader and is now the tail wagging the dog. There is a place for a focused effort. ….” the rest of it is important to read. I’ll end it there for this post though.
Fat chance Pat. DOE is hogging the funds for ultra low LET ultra low dose external x experiments on GM mice.
About as realistic as a plastic Porsche out of a Corn Flakes box. A cheap and nasty model which has cost a lot of truth and which bears no resemblance to the afflictions suffered by nuclear victims.
There is no beneficial dose and there is no safe one. The degree of risk is proportional to accumulated dose. Dose accumulated over time is the equivalent to that dose given at one time.
The advocates of hormesis cannot add up. This is because their ideology does not permit it. A lower dose can have a more profound effect per unit dose than a higher dose in terms of the most vulnerable. The vulnerability of the chromosome depends stage of cell division. Ionizing effectiveness is dependent upon oxygen tension within the cell. The manual worker is more at risk than those relaxing or sleeping given the same shielding considerations. The modern state of nuclear advocacy is totally bent and crocked.
Where authorities repeatedly state “All is well, perfectly safe” and where the population increasingly experience evidence by suffering to the contrary, all that happens is increasing incongruence between official dictates and the reality of suffering experienced by ordinary people. There is a loss of faith in leadership. And that is one primary reason why nuclear industry is a threat to the good order of society. It often takes a revolt to change things.
Changing the leadership of the NRC and other nuclear authorities, is not going to stop the process of social upheaval anywhere, particularly in Japan. Only compliance with the truth and known facts by those authorities will achieve. And they will have to shut themselves down if they obeyed the dictates of reality.
Is there proof that the findings of the Project Sunshine Sr90 animal studies are flawed? Is nuclear fallout safe? Is there are report relating to a fission fallout product which shows its danger? Yes, many.
Particularly in relation to Beagle dogs and plutonium, and Pecher’s work with rodents. But his work isn’t modern is it?
What does GE say?
GE have over time, updated their website. The latest source I have for the Sr89 Cl (the injectable salt) prescription data is given below:
Metastron Prescribing Information
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
The relevant quote is :
“Carcinogenesis, Mutagenesis, Impairment of Fertility
Data from a repetitive dose animal study suggests that
Strontium-89 Chloride is a potential carcinogen. Thirty-three of
 40 rats injected with Strontium-89 Chloride in ten consecutive
 monthly doses of either 250 or 350 μCi/kg developed
 malignant bone tumors after a latency period of approximately
 NINE (9) MONTHS. No neoplasia was observed in the control animals.

Treatment with Strontium-89 Chloride should be restricted to
patients with well documented metastatic bone disease.
 Adequate studies with Strontium-89 Chloride have not been
 erformed to evaluate mutagenic potential or effects on fertility.
 Pregnancy: Teratogenic effects.
 Pregnancy Category D. See Warnings section.” end quote.
In contrast to the decades of Strontium 90 injection studies of animals conducted at great cost by the nuclear authorities in charge of Project Sunshine, the GE data is concrete. Nuclear emissions are not safe.
The reason for this is given by Pecher in 1941. A miniscule physical amount of Sr89, when present in the body tissue, is the equivalent of a huge external whole body x ray dose.
So as much as Marshall Brucer might want me to think Sr89 acts like a drug, it does not. Radiologically it turns the body into a radiation source. There is no shielding and the seat of the contamination is the body’s hot spot.
When I see Japanese workers on the roofs of homes in Japan, I want to cry, but can’t. They drive the shit further into the roof, where it will await disturbance. They drive into little streams that runs across the garden, into the gutters and to god knows where.
Instead of crawling on their hands and knees to remove each speck, they use bulldozers and brooms while ordinary people walk by.
They disobey every rule of decontamination known and spend billions of yen doing it. They force civilians into hot zones and cause refugees to live in uncertainty, with no hope and in substandard surroundings.
If nuclear industry cannot afford proper remediation, it is bankrupt and unworthy of being pursued as a technology. If it cannot stand on own without the protection of government enforced secrecy rules, if it cannot speak the truth, it is not worthy of use and must be abandoned.
It has been a long time since Dr. Pecher and Dr. Aebersold told their truth in 1941. It is time it was household news. There is no controversy. If a radiation emitting fleck, spot, colloidal particle, dust speck, call it what you will, is taken into the body and woven into tissue, the dose is not diminished, it magnified many times. Compared to a whole body X ray source.
Being 28,000 times more radioactive than Radium 226, Sr89 is one of the worst offenders in the creation of immediate damage and ongoing harm. For, long after it has totally decayed to stability, the huge accumulated dose it causes strips years of life from its victims.
And that is why the FDA forbids its use except in the case of end stage terminal disease.
So how come nuclear industry is allowed to claim safety even when that industry emits this substance and many others, both routinely and in emergencies?
This substance, this Sr89, illustrates a point. It is illegal for doctors to administer it to the healthy. Yet nuclear industry, claiming medical status, claims its emissions, either routine or caused by emergency failure of its plant or plants, pretends its emissions are either safe or beneficial or both.
In fact, if the nuclear industry were actually run by doctors, the FDA would have them arrested. For breaches of the code controlling the admission of radio isotopes. Medical isotopes are effectively controlled. Industrial ones, patently, are not. The FDA is not privy to the secrets controlled by the Atomic Energy Act.
There is a contradiction of facts held by nuclear authorities and this moral and ethical dilemma is at the nub of nuclear secrecy. If the voters actually knew and understood, they would vote no to nuclear activity of the sort conducted under the protection of government laws.
Both Pecher and Aebersold died by their own hand. Pecher in Canada in 1941 and Aebersold in New Mexico in the 1960s.
As always, the reasons will be complex. Only LIbby, Hamilton, the Lawrences and a few others knew enough of Pecher to keep the secret of his work. Even though it was published in the academic press, only those of the same field of interest had a consistent view. What became lost to medicine remained a secret knowledge held by the nuclear authorities. To the detriment of the people. Pecher was not the one to identify the magnifying effect of an internal emitter.
Those internal emitters which are biologically significant because they mimic nutrients magnify in the food chain. A dose deemed dilute on a dairy pasture magnifies itself within the body with each portion of milk consumed by the human. So that even though roughly 90% of the strontium is rejected by the bovine udder (more gets through in goats) the risk to humans increases with each glass drunk, until an equilibrium dose is reached. The proof of fallout, as known by those who read the pre 1942 literature knew, would be found in the bones of babies. Even still borns, those who had never suckled. These too were found to have radio strontium in their bones. How? Because, as Pecher reported in 1940, the Sr89 stored in the outer layer of the trabecular bone, held in a far looser crystal structure than that of the calcium lattice, is released back into the blood stream of the mother, crosses the placenta and is deposited in the fetus. This tends to occur later in pregnancy. In humans this may occur a long time after the mother’s exposure to radio strontium. Menopause is another when radio strontium releases from bone, to flood the soft tissues with dose.
The old project sunshine nuclear authorities sought to use mothers and babies as dose indicators in a mad scheme to demonstrate, perversely, the opposite of what they already knew. This attitude of arrogant disregard continues to this day.
For example:
Joe Hamilton’s “Dear Chuck” Letter – Forgotten by Medicine but a constant military secret -
That the long term military interest and control continued regarding human data relating to internalised Sr89 is evidenced by the April 6 1954 Letter to Dr. L. Dunham from Dr Joseph Hamilton re the medical use of radioisotopes:
“Dear Chuck: Please find enclosed the available data from the University of California Hospital which was compiled by members of Stone’s staff who incidentally are quite unaware of the classified nature of this material. I discussed this matter with Dr. Stone and told him that it should not be discussed with anyone in the Division of Radiology with the exception of the two of us.” …” The picture is not too clear since a number of patients received stable strontium and several others received some amounts of radio-strontium.”
“Our own experimental program is progressing very nicely using both rats and monkeys.”
“The use of radioactive strontium, (Sr89) in the treatment of patients…the rationale, based on experimental animal studies with metastatic carcinoma to bone and in osteogenic sarcoma was initiated in 1940 by Charles Pecher….Pecher’s experimental findings were confirmed by Treadwell (Mrs. Anne de G. Low-Beer) , et al, who investigated uptake of radio-strontium by bone tumours in six patients prior to biopsy or amputation.” Secret.
Source Document: pdf scan provided by US Department of Energy Opennet. Search for joseph Hamilton, Strontium 89, Pecher, Dear Chuck.
Even as they continued a militarized form of Pecher’s work, they sought to keep it secret. Presenting fallout as safe and confiscating the passports of American citizens who spoke the truth, hauling them before the House UnAmerican Activities Committee (Pauling).
As so it goes, until today, the industry presents itself as some sort of dispensing agent for “beneficial rays” . They may live in 1924 but most of us do not.
Whereas, even as their reactors burn and bubble, they say “all is well. We can afford this once every 30 years”. Shall we let them spend the money to have that?
Who will be next to feel the lash of nuclear lies in the wake of nuclear disaster? England? China?

In the end, after a period, when the lies have been recorded over time and flung back at the mouths which uttered them, one realizes nuclear industry is helpless before aware voters. Its utterances are as effective a crowd control measure as a mauling by a flock of dead sheep is.

I await that day. It is a very poor thing though when I, an archivist’s nightmare, should feel utterly compelled to tell my truth simply because as an 18 year old soldier I saw hot particles register on the dial of my military scintillator. Hot Particles exist, I have “seen” them. They are not science fiction, they are not “contrails”. They exist in nuclear emissions, the artificial ones being dozens, hundreds and thousands times more deadly than the decay particles of the uranium chain. And really, what more need I say? Noone in authority will listen or respond. They never have, except to tell me to shut up about the danger posed by the 1970s era “Diamond” brand Chinese made radium painted bed side clocks.

A numeric representation of the hunt for a hot particle on a lino floor:
Numericals – meter reading on a scintillator. FDS – Full scale deflection of the scintillator dial needle as the probe is moved systematically over the floor and in close proximity to it:


Best of luck with your bonfires and steam cleaners, Japan.

My task in the 1970s was easy. I only worked on surfaces. In fact the biosphere is three dimensional and the risk continues over time.
Had I been tasked to monitor 100 cubic meters of dirt, it would have taken me, with my method, at least a lifetime to monitor.

To put it in technical language :

Even individual nuclear fuel particles, released
uncontrolled into the environment in a severe nuclear
accident, may represent an acute health hazard….
…Their identification and detection in the
environment represents a technical, analytical and
even philosophical challenge for radiation protection.
…the problem that highly active particles may be
present in the air although the external dose rate is
below the recommended operative action level is not
only theoretical.
” (Source: Pollanen, R. “Nuclear Fuel
Particles in the Environment – Characteristics, Atmospheric
Transport and Skin Doses”, STUK – Radiation and Nuclear
Safety Authority, University of Helsinki, Department of
Physics, Academic Dissertation, presented May 28, 2002.
ISBN 951-712-528-3)

Had the conditions which exist in schools and homes of Japan’s hot zones today existed within my work area in 1972, we would have donned the oxygen masks and cleaned up, washing ourselves afterward in the emergency shower.

Nuclear progress is not reflected in the current state of Japan. Rather the economy drive in health physics is plain site for all the world to see. The new normal which I will never accept.

Three Clips from “Backs to the Blast, an Australian Nuclear Story”

February 25, 2013

Backs to the Blast, an Australian Nuclear Story
Made 25 years after nuclear tests were conducted in SA in the 1950s, this documentary stirred up a political hornet’s nest. (Video excerpt 1.47 minutesalso has educational notes. This clip chosen to be PG)

Backs to the Blast, an Australian Nuclear Story
Made 25 years after nuclear tests were conducted in SA in the 1950s, this documentary stirred up a political hornet’s nest. (Video excerpt 1.51 minutes This clip chosen to be PG)
Backs to the Blast, an Australian Nuclear Story
“Clip description
In the mid 1950s above ground atomic tests are carried out in South Australia. The bomb is dropped by aircraft and the blast is seen. Various people recall the tests including RAAF driver Ric Johnston, RAAF wireless operator Eric Geddes, an unidentified man and an unidentified Aboriginal woman.” The lady is not unknown, She is Lallie Lennon.

From the British Veterans, Dave Whyte and Dennis Hayden. The Aussie Veterans Last Stand

February 25, 2013

I’ll have to get more on this from Alan and Terry.

Dave and Dennis emailed me with this one. They are quick off the mark. I missed it. No doubt Terry will have more in the December Veterans’ magazine.

Dave emailed: “Hello Paul,

Many thanks for your e-mails.

I am in the process of sending the following e-mail to all the MP’s and about three hundred Members of the House of Lords but I have been informed I am sending too many e-mails (error 451) in a short space of time. It may take a day or two but I will get them out eventually.

All the best


My Lords, Ladies and Members of Parliament,

I beg of you to spare ‘Seven’ minutes of your valuable time to watch the following programme.

These were British tests, planned and operated by the British Government. The tests at Christmas Island were conducted in the same manner as shown in the film and British nuclear Veterans are met with the same problems.

The Ministry of Defence are refusing to reveal all the correspondence relating to the levels of radiation the ‘Human Guinea Pigs’ (Servicemen) were forced to endure whilst testing British nuclear weapons.

If the British Government have nothing to hide, I ask you: Why are we being denied access to information on radiation levels? and why are all British nuclear veterans being denied a cytogenetic blood analysis? (given to Civilian nuclear workers).

Perhaps the British Government are attempting to shield the Civilian Nuclear Industry by refusing to reveal the damage caused to the British Troops and their Allies whilst experimenting with nuclear power!

The final solution could be in your hands!

Yours sincerely

Dave Whyte
Ex Royal Engineers
Christmas Island 1958

end quote

Text of article:

Maralinga veterans in last-ditch bid for compensation
PM By Rebecca Brice
Updated Fri Feb 22, 2013 12:21am AEDT

Almost 300 Australian veterans of British nuclear testing are making a last-ditch attempt to win compensation.

They want the Human Rights Commission to find that the Australian Government knowingly exposed them to harmful radiation by ordering them to take part in the tests in the SA outback.

While any recommendation from that action will not be binding, they are hoping to embarrass the Government into compensating them and providing medical treatment.

Many of the surviving personnel, ordered to take part in the tests at Maralinga in the 1950s and ’60s, blame their medical conditions on exposure to nuclear radiation.

Stacks Goudkamp lawyer Joshua Dale says given the advanced age of the group, it is very much a case of now or never.

“This submission is really the end of the line,” he said.

“It’s the last opportunity that we have to try and get some kind of recourse from the Australian Government.

“It essentially says that the Australian governments have breached the human rights of the veterans and this is for a number of reasons.

“The nuclear veterans were essentially used as guinea pigs during the nuclear testing.

“There’s evidence that has revealed that the veterans were sent in after testing had taken place to see what the type of effect radiation would have on the human body, and there’s various articles under the universal declaration that specifically go to a right to life and obviously the right to a standard of living as well.”

The veterans’ decision to take their case to the Human Rights Commission follows a UK court’s ruling that the link between the tests and the veterans’ health problems could not be proven.

In 2010 the Government allocated $24 million towards service pensions and healthcare cards for the veterans and their widows.

A spokeswoman for Veterans Affairs Minister Warren Snowdon says eligible veterans have access to a broad range of compensation and health treatment already.

But Mr Dale says many are caught up in disputes over the entitlements.

“The problem is these administrative disputes are largely being viciously defended by the Government,” he said.

“In a lot of the cases they’re unsuccessful because of the time that has lapsed and due to the secrecy of the type of testing that was taking place.

“A lot of the records don’t even show what type of levels of radiation they were exposed to, which means there’s very little evidence to prove that they were exposed to harmful levels and whether or not those levels could have potentially caused their illnesses.

“One of the veterans that we represent, he suffers from leukaemia, and they’ve said that he was too far away from the testing to be exposed to dangerous levels of radiation.

“He’s really left high and dry at the moment with this horrific illness.”

Avon Hudson, 76, is one of 8,000 Australian service personnel that took part in the tests.

He has echoed Mr Dale’s sentiments on how urgent the case is.

“If we don’t get what we’re entitled to now, well I suppose all we can do is throw our hands in the air and wait for the end to come, because we’re all getting too old,” Mr Hudson said.

“We won’t be here in five years.

“Every year that goes by it’s less likely you’ll be able to cope with these things.

“We were never given any briefing as to what we were doing, what the dangers were, what risks were involved or what precautions had to be taken.”
end quote.

It is clear from email feedback and information held by the Atomic Ex-Servicemes’ Association that many people are unsuccessful in obtaining justice in Australia, even in this era of amendments which were announced by the Rudd government. Placing improved remedies on the books is pretty cruel when the system makes obtaining near on impossible. More than one person has confirmed that when illnesses are claimed to be due to military service without mentioning radiation exposure the chances of success are reasonable. However where the claim is made on the true proposition that radiation caused those same illnesses. even where radiogenesis is admitted by government, the success of the claim becomes highly improbable.

I have received an email from Geelong confirming this information. If one’s needs are severe, and they are for many suffering illness due to service, the most productive thing for the individual is to claim that general service conditions caused the illness rather than radiation.

However, it is only nuclear veterans alone who have suffered a massive increase in risk of cancer. Even though the government does not acknowledge the radio genesis of the illness.

This is a deliberate fudge which protext nuclear industry.

We have the uniform and consistent testimony of Australian Aboriginal people and their sufferings. These facts are indigenous to the Australian setting. We have the situation where diagnosis was with held for 3 decades in the case of at least one person. When diagnosis was made it was in a setting which excluded radiation as a cause. It is hard to blame a 25 year old doctor for not allowing for events which occurred before they were born. Still the patient was ignored when she pointed out the facts. Then there is the Australian court case struck from teh public record, in which it was determined by the court that nuclear fallout caused the illness suffered by the plaintiff. While the Australian Radiation regulator, ARPANSA, maintains, on the basis of British algebra, that the bombs caused no harm. Yet Aboriginal people have been excluded from 3 health surveys. The civilians who might speak with least secrecy constraints are excluded. Meanwhile the medical files of the veterans and civilians who were treated at the time are lost!!!! So the government claims.

Well, I know what I know and have my beliefs. It is a case of hoping there is a god, and that brimstone awaits the liars. Not much chop in the here and now though.

I recall a conversation I had a couple of decades back, when I had a stint in a relevant government department as a temp worker. A supervisor was an ex nurse who worked in one of the hospitals up north. And she vividly recalled the case of a young airman who lay dying from radiation sickness. The medical staff were bullied into silence. This event is not unique. US veterans and French veterans, the people of French Polynesia all have similar stories. And the facts of them, held by governments, are all suppressed, in my opinion.

There is little hope of justice in these matters. If the same laws of statistics applied to nuclear veterans and civilian victims, were applied to British gunshot victims, noone would be admitted to having suffered that fate either. Those statistical laws are not applied to gunshot victims. For they have a large bullet in their bodies, until it is extracted. The actuality for the individual is not reflected by the maths applied to the masses. Nuclear victims have little bullets, many of them, entrenched within their tissue. And the tests which confirm this are deemed by authorities to be inadmissible.

If the bullet is small enough, and if the government authorities fired it, they deny it is there. This incongruence – this difference between the official pronouncement and the individual experience – has been a hall mark of nuclear industry since 1942.

Powerful Lies – The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster ….

February 25, 2013

Thanks to Captain D for passing this one along. I don’t often put Rense material up. This is really is food for thought.

Powerful Lies – The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster
And The Radioactive Effects On Human Health
By Richard Wilcox PhD

“Even one atom of uranium undergoing alpha decay has the potential for creating a fatal cancer.” – Paul Zimmerman, A Primer in the Art of Deception (1; p. 53)

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous, and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James (2)

“It ain’t what we don’t know that causes all the trouble, it’s what we do know that ain’t so.” – a saying from Jim in Texas (Ibid.)

“The first rule of holes: when you’re in one, stop digging.” – Molly Ivins (3)

The Trouble We Are In

Large scale nuclear disasters like Chernobyl or Fukushima are comparable with other deadly man-made phenomena. The number of annual global automobile deaths is 1.3 million (4). Terrible though it is, an automobile accident kills just once; radiation breaks down the Earth’s DNA of life. GMOs (genetically modified organisms) threaten to replace that fabric of life with an artificial and diseased template (5). Secret geoengineering programs of atmospheric aerosol spraying (chemtrails) may be causing irreparable harm to the very life cycles of the Earth (6). Deforestation and habitat loss destroy and displace the Earth’s biological and cultural diversity.

The Road To Fukushima Starts In Chernobyl

Much of this article relies on the readings of and quotations from Paul Zimmerman and his book, A Primer In The Art Of Deception (Op. cit.).

Zimmerman states that:

“The entire cover-up of the effects of radiation hinges on Chernobyl. This was the most substantial release of radiation into the environment before Fukushima. Verified health effects will accurately depict the true hazard of man-made radiation released amidst populations. This is why Chernobyl effects have to be covered up by [the nuclear establishment by] any and every means” (personal communication, February, 2013).

Zimmerman chronicles the wide range of congenital malformations, diseases and types of deaths to children exposed to the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster radiation which occurred both in the womb and after being born (from the European Committee on Radiation Risk report, entitled: “Chernobyl: 20 years on”). Most of the data is from the late 1980s up to mid 1990s, indicating the time frame we should be watching for at Fukushima (“A Primer,” pp. 559 – 563).

The nuclear establishment ignores these effects using outdated and phoney methods for calculation. Yablokov and colleagues estimated nearly a million deaths due to Chernobyl (7), in contrast to the small handful of deaths the WHO claims occurred or will occur. The World Health Organization, the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the United Nations are in cahoots:

“A total of up to 4000 people could eventually die of radiation exposure from the Chernobyl nuclear power plant (NPP) accident nearly 20 years ago, an international team of more than 100 scientists has concluded. As of mid-2005, however, fewer than 50 deaths had been directly attributed to radiation from the disaster, almost all being highly exposed rescue workers, many who died within months of the accident but others who died as late as 2004” (8).

How is it that estimates could vary so wildly?

The main reason for this massive conspiracy being foisted on the public is what is referred to as the Chernobyl Forum, which is a coalition of United Nations related agencies (9).

Janette D. Sherman who edited the landmark study carried out by Russian scientists blows the lid off the fraudulent methodology of the Chernobyl Forum. Can something be called “science” if it intentionally ignores relevant empirical data in spades?

Sherman’s findings are worth quoting at length:

“On the 20th Anniversary of Chernobyl WHO and the IAEA published the Chernobyl Forum Report, mentioning only 350 sources, mainly from the English literature while in reality there are more than 30,000 publications and up to 170,000 sources that address the consequences of Chernobyl. After waiting two decades for the findings of Chernobyl to be recognized by the United Nations, three scientists, Alexey Yablokov from Russia, and Vasily Nesterenko and Alexey Nesterenko from Belarus undertook the task to collect, abstract and translate some 5000 articles reported by multiple scientists, who observed first-hand the effects from the fallout….

The greatest amount of radioactivity fell outside of Belarus, Ukraine and European Russia, extending across the northern hemisphere as far away as Asia, North Africa, and North America, while the greatest concentrations continue to affect the 13 million living in Belarus, Ukraine, and European Russia….

Thus data from multiple scientists estimate the overall mortality from the Chernobyl catastrophe, for the period from April 1986 to the end of 2004, to be 985,000, a hundred times more than the WHO/IAEA estimate….

The human and economic costs are enormous: in the first 25 years the direct economic damage to Belarus, Ukraine, and Russia has exceeded $500 billion. Belarus spends about 20% of its national annual budget, Ukraine up to 6%, and Russia up to 1% to partially mitigate some of the consequences” (10).

Zimmerman notes that:

“There is an underlying prejudice being played upon here: ‘our science is good and Russian science is bad.’ The conclusions of the Chernobyl Forum are reached by ignoring a huge body of research conducted in Eastern Europe that just happens not to be published in English. Certainly, if the UN was genuinely interested in Chernobyl rather than fabricating results, they could have paid for translations of relevant articles. Basically, it is just propaganda and worthless from a scientific perspective” (pers. comm.).

However worthless the Chernobyl Forum studies are, they have become the mainstream scientific consensus and de facto reality, and a deadly lie which now contaminates public consciousness.

Japan Mass Media Banned From Reporting Radiation Dangers

How many people will die from Fukushima nuclear meltdown radiation? Two years have passed since Japan’s Fukushima nuclear disaster. Every day we learn of more evidence of the dangers of low-level radiation from a variety of natural and man-made causes, including medical x-rays and scans (11; 12). Our health, and particularly the health of people in Fukushima, is under increasing distress.

We now see evidence of children with thyroid cancer from the Fukushima area (13). It has also been revealed that the mass media in Japan is unofficially BANNED from discussing radiation issues. Journalists who write about radiation dangers will be fired whereas they are permitted to debate whether Japan should use nuclear energy or not (14).

The latter debate is permissible because it is long-term and changeable depending on the whims of government policy and manipulation of public sentiment. Serious discussion of radiation danger strikes fear in the heart of the public, and may also lead to costly liability payments, and is therefore taboo. Undoubtedly, the ban on discussing the danger of radiation in the media translates into public ignorance about radiation. It is astonishing to me that most of the people I talk to in Tokyo are only dimly aware that radiation is entering their bodies on a daily basis: from public water supply, food, drinks, ongoing air pollution emissions from the FNPP, and the burning of radioactive debris in public incinerators. People think that it is only a small risk.

Radiation biologist, Dr. Ian Fairlie writes that there are many studies which have “good statistical power” showing the increase in danger of cancer from low-level radiation from background radiation and radon; medical CT scans; living in proximity to nuclear plants, etc.

“It is dispiriting to read many articles – on both sides of the Atlantic – by media pundits and poorly-informed scientists about low-level radiation risks. These articles commonly assert, with little or no evidence, that there is nothing to worry about radiation and that nuclear projects are encumbered by overly strict safety limits. In particular, they usually state that no risks are seen below 100 mSv [millisieverts]; that the Linear No-Threshold (LNT) model is wrong; and that there were only about 50 deaths at Chernobyl with no more expected” (15).

Lower End Estimates: Fukushima Related Mortality

As for the defendants of the official position and estimates that minimize nuclear dangers and deaths, we have Stanford University scientists weighing in at 130 cancer deaths (16). Beyea puts the number higher at 1,000 deaths due to gamma radiation ground shine, but Beyea’s calculation appears not to include internal radiation in the model (17). These are the kinds of estimates generally touted in the mainstream science journals which focus on various aspects of exposure but tend to ignore the full extent of constant exposure.

Fairlie is a moderate within the debate and puts the number of deaths “at least a few thousand fatal cancers [that] will occur among those exposed to Fukushima’s radioactive fallout” but does not mention exposure to internal radiation through consumption of food and water. He correctly points out that Japan was lucky that most of the radiation blew out to sea, sparing the land and inhabitants from the greatest portion of radiation exposure:

“Fukushima is clearly a serious disaster but it is not as serious as Chernobyl. Radioactive air emissions are much more important than radioactive sea discharges in terms of their radiation doses to people, and the dispersed radioactivity to air from Fukushima has been estimated to be about 10% to 40% of the amount dispersed from Chernobyl. About a thousand square km near the Fukushima were contaminated, but at Chernobyl the area affected was much larger: over 200,000 square km throughout Europe were seriously contaminated by fallout, according to the European Commission” (18).

In contrast to official Japanese government policy which allows 20 millisieverts of annual background radiation, a joint French and Japanese NGO project found that “external radiation” continues to cause “unacceptable health risks for hundreds of thousands of citizens” and that government estimates ignore internal consumption of radionuclides through food, water and air.

“Dose beyond which the risk of cancer in the long term is considered ‘unacceptable’ by ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection) is 1 [millisievert] per year, which corresponds to 17 cancers per 100,000 people exposed” (19).

The first large scale survey of contaminated food done by Japanese scientists found that:

“Radiocesium was detected in 25 of 26 samples from Fukushima. The median dietary intake of radiocesium was 4.0 Bq/day. The estimated annual dose from radiocesium was calculated assuming that the daily intake of radiocesium was constant throughout the year. The median estimated dose level was 23 [microsieverts/year]. The estimated dose level of radiocesium was significantly higher in Fukushima than in the Kanto region and western Japan…. The preliminary estimated dietary dose levels among Fukushima residents were much lower than the maximum permissible dose 1 [millisievert/year], based on new Japanese standard limits for radiocesium in foods (100 Bq/kg for general foods)” (20).

The problem with many of these surveys and estimates is that they are very rough guesses that average the dose, but how was it calculated and can the methods and data even be trusted? Some people will be getting less than 4 becquerels (bq) per day but others higher. For how many days, weeks, months and years will this rate continue? Over ten years that’s 14,600 bq.

A More Critical View Of Mortality Rates

Dr. Chris Busby, one of the most outspoken critics of the nuclear status quo, who also specifically studies the affects of radiation on health, offered a more dire scenario in 2011:

“[W]ithin 100 km of Fukushima Daiichi, approximately 200,000 excess cancers will occur within the next 50 years with about half of them diagnosed in the next 10 years, if the 3.3 million people in the area remain there for one year. [Busby] estimates over 220,000 excess cancers in the 7.9 million people from 100 to 200 km in the next 50 years, also with about half of them to be diagnosed in the next 10 years” (21).

That equates to roughly 420,000 exposed people, not including most of the Tokyo area, or other radiological associated non-fatal diseases that could harm and maim.

Retired nuclear engineer and activist Arnie Gundersen bases his estimate on the epidemiological data from the Chernobyl and Three Mile Island accidents and compared radiation amounts and dispersion with population density in Japan. He estimates a million deaths could occur due to the accident (22).

Shimatsu has pointed out anomalous data that indicates mortality rates have risen in the elder population of Fukushima area residents. This could be related to the weakening of their immune systems due to radiation exposure (23).

Finagling The Fallout

This radiation contamination map of the Fukushima nuclear disaster made by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is startling in its depiction of deposition across the Pacific ocean and throughout North America (24).

Here again is the blandly presented propaganda from the US government that minimizes danger to health. They do not take into account the many variables or hotspots or that not everyone receives an “average” dose. In a sense this is worse than propaganda, and is a huge lie. While revealing the extent of the radiation, the international public is told that the amount is nothing to worry about, as if low-level radiation is safe.

“While the USGS does not assess human health risks from exposure to radioactive fallout, the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s RadNet confirms that radiation levels in the United States were far below the level of concern for human health impact.” Other mainstream scientists found that the wide dispersal of radiation into the air was due to “at least 80% of the core inventory” having “been released into the atmosphere and indicates a broad meltdown of reactor cores. The radioactivity emitted into the atmosphere could represent 10% of the Chernobyl accident releases for I-131 and Cs-137” (25).

However, this estimate contrasts with an earlier study that found radioactive fallout (not including radiation released into the water) at 50 percent of Chernobyl releases for cesium (26). If radiation released into water is included the total amount released– because no radiation was released into water by the landlocked Chernobyl reactor– could be as high as 90 percent of Chernobyl by some estimates (27). Chernobyl was mainly a one-time event but Fukushima is ongoing, steadily releasing substantial quantities of radiation into the air and water (28).

Anyone not privy to the most technically relevant data must trust the experts. As Arnie Gundersen once said, “it’s a numbers game” when it comes to figuring out how much radiation escaped given the same criminals in charge of the accident, Tepco (Tokyo Electric Power Company), are in charge of disclosing the data as they see fit. There is now zero public trust in government agencies and what they are reporting when it comes to public safety. Without becoming paranoid the public should always be aware of pat bromides handed out by the nuclear-friendly agents.

As we know, Tepco spokespersons are proven liars and their credibility is less than zero (29; 30).

How Radiation Affects Life

The nuclear establishment would prefer the general public believe that nuclear radiation is essentially nothing to be concerned with. However, their own science and words belie the rhetoric. The Cult of Nuclearists have billions of dollars to devote to propaganda whereas the Nuclear Truth Tellers (NTTers) are marginalized by a whole host of economic and political tricks. One of the trump cards that the Nuclearists hold is that understanding the science of radiation effects when presented in an intentionally confusing way to mislead is beyond the capabilities of the average person to grasp, and that they have no other choice than to trust the experts. Fortunately there is a large body of literature that debunks the nuclear industry’s powerful lies.

Busby has two important and rigorously researched books on radiation science that are among the most important (31; 32). I also recommend a perusal through longtime activist Russell Hoffman’s incredible library of nuclear related books (33). Hoffman’s “Code Killers” is an easily understood, exhaustively researched and colorfully presented educational primer on the dangers of nuclear energy. It can be downloaded for free and is an ideal educational tool (34).

Insights Into The Science Of Radiation Biology

Paul Zimmerman’s 778 page book, “A Primer In The Art Of Deception: The Cult Of Nuclearists, Uranium Weapons And Fraudulent Science” (2009) is the equivalent of taking a college level course – if not an entire curriculum – from the self described “self-educated student of the subject matter” (Op. cit.). For an introduction to his work here is an outstanding audio interview (35).

Since 1938 when the uranium atom was first split, the US has accumulated some “700,000 metric tons” of depleted uranium as a byproduct of weapons manufacture and nuclear power waste. Why is nuclear waste and emissions a problem?

To quote Zimmerman:

“All atoms of uranium are radioactive. At some point in their lifetime, they spontaneously undergo radioactive decay and emit subatomic particles and energy from their nuclei. When this process occurs in the crust of the Earth, it is of no consequence to life. Decay while the atom is entrapped within the body of a living organism, however, is altogether different. When radiation from a radioactive atom is released into a biological medium, it creates damage to the molecular structures that make up that living system” (p. ii).

“There is not a single life-enhancing benefit to be derived from releasing ionizing radiation into the environment…. Ionizing radiation breaks chemical bonds, destroying in living systems biologically significant micromolecules, and as a result, altering biological function. On a planet teeming with life–impossible without the exquisitely precise interplay of biochemical choreography–ionizing radiation, concentrated by humans and then released, is a force of disorder, chaos and death” (p. 8).

Another basic point of understanding blurred in the public mind by the nuclear establishment is gauging the effect that natural uranium has on the human body versus uranium that has been concentrated for nuclear technology. The nuclear establishment claims that the effects of eating a banana which may be relatively high in uranium content, is equivalent to an insoluble microparticle of uranium which may become lodged in the lung after a depleted uranium (DU) munition explodes on the battlefield, or when a nuclear accident such as Fukushima releases large amounts of hot particles into the air where they can be swept by the wind and then inhaled.

Another quote from Zimmerman:

“The solubility/insolubility of particles released by nuclear weapons or radiation accidents would depend on the chemistry of the the nuclides involved. There is not a blanket answer for all radionuclides and whatever other atoms they might be bound to. Hot particles are particles composed of hundreds/thousands/millions of molecules which contain some quantity of radioactive atoms. How that particle behaves in the human body has a lot to do with how easily is dissolves in body fluid. Both soluble and insoluble particles of uranium, plutonium, radium, and the other alpha emitters release alpha particles into surrounding tissue. The significance of INSOLUBLE particles is that they can have a much longer residency inside the body, perhaps a person’s entire life. This gives them increased opportunity to successfully target biologically significant macromolecules such as DNA in their vicinity” (pers. comm.).

Uranium found in nature is present in the food and water chain, is soluble, consists of about 2 millionths of a gram of daily intake. Since it is widespread throughout many organ systems and is then eliminated through bodily processes, no cluster of cells receives a concentrated dose of radiation. Therefore, Zimmerman notes that uranium from nature “presents an infinitely small hazard to the health of the organism as a whole” (p. 46).

But there is a tricky linguistic distinction to be understood. The nuclear industry calls uranium that has been thoroughly processed into a purified form of uranium as “natural uranium.”

While it is true that originally this uranium was found in nature, it is in fact a man-made uranium product with nothing really natural about it. Just like some food products on the shelves of grocery stores that say “all natural” or “natural flavors” on the label even though there are dozens of artificial food additives in the product.

“Natural uranium — uranium that has been concentrated by human beings — represents an enhanced radiological hazard over the uranium found in nature. Since the 1940s, humankind has unearthed millions of tons of uranium-bearing ore, extracted the uranium and concentrated it. this man-made product is a new radiological pollutant that never before existed on the Earth’s surface” (p. 46).

The difference between uranium-bearing ore and uranium products that have been refined vary drastically in radioactive concentration. Weapons grade uranium is the most potent by far, but even yellow cake uranium that has undergone rudimentary refinement, and is used for nuclear reactors, is 300,000 times more radioactive than uranium found in nature when equal volumes are compared.

A main problem for human health are the alpha particles that are released in the process called “ionization.”

Zimmerman notes that:

“Ionization is the breakup of an electrically neutral molecule into positive and negative ions. To break the chemical bonds holding together each of the molecules in our body requires the impact of approximately 34 electron-volts” (pers. comm.).

Given this possibility:

“One alpha particle has the potential of creating–123,000 ionizations. In a cascading effect, the charged particles created in these ionizing events go on to initiate millions more ionizations. An alpha particle is a bull in the proverbial china shop. It massively disrupts the chemical integrity of the molecules that constitute a living system” (p. 51).

Although alpha particles do not penetrate great distance, they are “not weak.” Due to the small distance they travel in tissue, they are extremely destructive to the cells through which they traverse. The alpha particle’s ionizing behavior results in “massive assault on the chemical integrity of a small population of cells…” (p. 52).

In the article Radiation Roulette by Ron Edwards, reference is made to a study of the effect of alpha radiation on the stem cells of mice. One of the authors of the study, Eric Wright, had this to say in a letter to the journal Nature:
” ‘relative biological effectiveness’ — a measure of how damaging low-level radiation can be in the body — for isotopes that emit alpha particles is ‘effectively infinite’ ” (36).

Particles from uranium munitions contain uranium in vastly greater concentrations than uranium found in nature in uranium ore. When they are released as hot particles into the air from exploding DU munitions which burn, they can be inhaled by populations downwind. Similarly, hot particles which contain a great variety of radionuclides that are released after a nuclear disaster can also be inhaled by humans downwind of the accident.

Zimmerman confirms that “a comparison can be made between DU and hot particles released from nuclear accidents resulting from fire and/or explosions. It is the burning of DU that turns it into microparticles which produces the internal hazard. The same would be true for hot particles produced in nuclear weapons explosions and accidents like Chernobyl and Fukushima. DU is a single radionuclide, uranium, with a tremendously long half-life. A nuclear reactor contains numerous biologically significant radionuclides with variable half-lives. The kinetics/biochemistry of uranium once inside the body is quite different from that of a host of radionuclides targeting different organ systems simultaneously with variable rates of disintegration due to the different rates of decay. The fact that DU is both chemically and radiologically hazardous, which nearly all radiobiologists deny, damns any other more active types of radiation gaining entrance into the interior of the body” (pers. comm.).

In other words, the hot particles that were emitted after the nuclear meltdowns and explosions at the Fukushima No. 1 power plant (FNPP) were every bit as dangerous, if not more so, than what soldiers in Iraq and other illegal war theaters experienced when DU munitions were used. This would especially be true for people living within close vicinity of the FNPP however researchers picked up significant numbers of hot particles in car engine filters as far away as Tokyo (37).

Some industry scams for dealing with nuclear pollution:

* Dilute it to “safe” levels before discharging it into the environment. But the same quantity of nuclear pollution is ultimately discharged.

* Mask the dangers of low dose radiation as if “low” quantity also means “low” risk.

* Averaging of internal doses over an entire organ even though the radioactive particle and alpha radiation may be attacking a very specific spot, a group of cells. Statistical averaging is a way of diluting the danger even though the hot particle is causing pinpoint damage (p. 198 – 203). This is like saying that if someone in a football stadium shoots a gun and kills a handful of people, it is really not that bad given there were 100,000 people in attendance.


Clearly the international public cannot trust the news that comes out of government, the nuclear industry or mainstream media when it comes to protecting public health. The public cannot continue to simply defer to those in positions of authority but must in the future investigate the facts for ourselves to determine our own health and safety, and more importantly to assure the health of generations to follow.

/ Richard Wilcox has a Ph.D. in Environmental Studies from a social science, holistic perspective. He teaches at a number of universities in the Tokyo, Japan area. His articles on environmental topics including the Fukushima nuclear disaster are archived at and are regularly published at Activist Post and His interviews with Jeff Rense are available at the website


1. Paul Zimmerman, A Primer in the Art of Deception: The Cult of Nuclearists, Uranium Weapons and Fraudulent Science (778 pgs., 2009).

2. Dresden James Quote

3. Molly Ivins Quotes

4. Annual Global Road Crash Statistics

5. A Silent Forest. The Growing Threat, Genetically Engineered Trees

6. Geoengineering Watch

7. Yablokov, V.B. Nesterenko, A. V. Nesterenko (2009). Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment. New York Academy of Sciences, 327 pgs.

8. Chernobyl: the true scale of the accident

9. The Chernobyl Forum

10. Chernobyl, 25 Years Later

11. Recent evidence on the risks of very low-level radiation

12. Many people unaware of radiation risk from CT scans

13. More Thyroid Cancers Found In Fukushima Children

14. Issues of Radioactive Exposure are Considered Taboo on Japanese Media

15. Recent evidence on the risks of very low-level radiation

16. Stanford researchers calculate global health impacts of the Fukushima nuclear disaster

17. Reassessing the health effects of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident

18. Fallout from Fukushima: One Year After

19. Press and CRMS CRIIRAD

20. Dietary Intake of Radiocesium in Adult Residents in Fukushima Prefecture and Neighboring Regions after the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Accident

21. Fukushima is Worse than Chernobyl – on Global Contamination

22. Nuclear Engineer Arnie Gundersen: Fukushima Meltdown Could Result in 1 Million Cases of Cancer

23. Is Fukushima A Factor In Japan’s Record Deaths In 2011-12?

24. Measurement of Radioactive Fallout from the March 2011 Fukushima Nuclear Reactor Incident

25. Analysis of Radionuclide Releases from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident Part II

26. Fallout forensics hike radiation toll

27. Tepco’s Cheapskate Tactics Put World at Risk

28. Fukushima’s Damnably Unstable Atoms Contaminate Pacific Ocean

29. What Else Is TEPCO Not Telling

30. Never Ending Load of Gobshite from the Lying Bastards of Tokyo Electric Power Company

31. Wings of Death: Nuclear Pollution and Human Health

32. Wolves of Water: A Study Constructed from Atomic Radiation, Morality, Epidemiology, Science, Bias, Philosophy and Death

33. Nuclear-related books in my collection -Russell Hoffman, Concerned Citizen

34. The Code Killers:Why DNA and ionizing radiation are a dangerous mix

Download here:

35. Rense & Paul Zimmerman – No ‘Safe’ Dose Of ANY Radiation Part 1

36. Radiation Roulette

37. Hot Particles and Measurement of Radioactivity

“Death Ash Rains on Betrayed Men” Couier Mail Queensland 24 Feb 13

February 25, 2013

Thanks to David Noonan for passing this one along.

…As late as 2010 it was confirmed at least one contaminated Royal Australian Air Force Lincoln bomber was buried at Amberley base….
‘Death ash’ rains on betrayed men

by:Terry Sweetman
From: The Sunday Mail (Qld)
February 24, 201312:00AM

KILL ZONE: Japanese fishermen were fatally affected by US nuclear testing on Bikini Atoll in 1946. Source: The Sunday Mail (Qld)
ONE of the great ironies of history is that the Japanese fishing boat that took 23 men into the fiery breath of America’s first hydrogen bomb was called the Lucky Dragon No 5.
That was on March 1, 1954, which is ancient history to most Australians, but there is a tragic echo right here and right now.
Lucky Dragon was fishing off Bikini Atoll, outside the declared danger zone, when the Castle Bravo thermonuclear device was detonated.
Oops. The blast was about twice as powerful as the boffins had calculated and the Lucky Dragon was showered with radioactive dust, which the Japanese poetically called death ash.
Soon the fishermen began to suffer nausea, pain and skin inflammation and, in September, radio operator Kuboyama Aikichi died.
It was a shocking incident but more shocking was the initial cover-up and official disinformation.
The Atomic Energy Commission initially indulged in some scientific hair-splitting to deny radiation was the problem and said the ship was deliberately inside the danger zone and even claimed the boat was a Russian spy ship. Eventually the US paid some miserable compensation.
The connection? Well, by 1954 no one could deny the dangers of radioactivity, something scientists and victims have known since the bombs were dropped on Japan nine years earlier. Now, the Lucky Dragon headlines guaranteed even Joe Blow knew of this invisible killer.
Yet, Britain continued to test atomic weapons in Australia right up until 1963 with safety precautions that did not reflect the state of contemporary scientific knowledge.
With the enthusiastic connivance of the Australian Government (more precisely, prime minister Robert Menzies, who bypassed his cabinet), the British detonated about a dozen nukes in our backyard. More than 8000 servicemen were involved in the tests and the measures for their safety were perfunctory at best and criminal at worst.
Claims have been made that they wore cotton uniforms while British scientists were rigged out in radiation suits, that they were asked to walk (even crawl) through the nuclear zone, handle contaminated equipment and fly through the fallout.
As late as 2010 it was confirmed at least one contaminated Royal Australian Air Force Lincoln bomber was buried at Amberley base.
And, it seems, subsequently many of the Australian servicemen were buried and largely forgotten.
A 2006 report commissioned by the Australian Government showed those working at the Maralinga and Emu Field testing sites were 23 per cent more likely to develop cancer than the general population, and 18 per cent more likely to die from cancer than the general population.
But, strangely, it concluded it was impossible to determine if that was due to exposure to radiation. Well, it surely wasn’t because of pixie dust.
Now 300 survivors are hoping for compensation through the Human Rights Commission, claiming their government knowingly exposed them to radiation by ordering them to take part in the tests.
What is it with governments that they are so profligate with the lives of citizens but so parsimonious when it comes to compensation?
Men and women sent to war, often with dubious justification, invariably end up fighting for their rights.
And now men who served at home in the cause of what was perceived as national security are struggling for recognition six decades after the event. Men who were cynically and carelessly exposed to a recognised threat were sent into danger as surely as any who served their country.
They trusted their government but the miserable response shows that trust was betrayed.
Oddly, the Lucky Dragon is now a museum ship and will probably be remembered long after Australia forgets its nuclear veterans

Social Impact of Thyroid Disease – Thyroid Australia

February 23, 2013

” Many people walk around feeling tired, run down and exhausted most of the time, often relying on various stimulants to make it through the day. One thing that is certain is that these individuals don’t suffer from a caffeine deficiency. In fact there is something dysfunctional, or out of balance with their internal biochemistry having multiple vague symptoms for a long duration of time. Unfortunately never being able to arrive at an adequate explanation through conventional approaches and the diagnostics to get a better handle on understanding the biochemical imbalances that apply to all Thyroid conditions.”

Autoimmune Thyroid disease in a lot of people isn’t easily or quickly cured. It is a long drawn out process that requires patience and support from both doctors and the wider community.

The symptoms of Hypothyroidism (underactive thyroid) being the most common condition can include: Depression, anxiety, cognition, learning, and/or memory impairment, loss of hair, loss of hearing and muscle tone, uncontrollable weight gain, , heart disease, ,hypo ventilation, psychosis, cold hands and feet, dry skin, fatigue, exhaustion, generalised malaise, restless sleep, occasional blurred vision, watery eyes, chronic sore throat and puffiness of the face, constant flu symptoms, bloating and discomfort, constipation, just to name a few, resulting is widespread dysfunction that can manifest in a variety of ways if cellular metabolism drops too low.

Some of the symptoms, of Hypothyroidism as well as that of Hyperthyroidism (overactive thyroid) are vague and diffuse and usually blamed on “emotional” problems.

Many of the symptoms are shared by the two predominate Thyroid conditions with an overactive Thyroid usually identified by prevailing symptoms including: Weight loss, hyperactivity and heat intolerance, rapid heart beat, false energy and fatigue, nervousness and irritability,loss of sleep, increased frequency of bowel movements, decrease in menstrual periods.

In the case of both an Underactive and Overactive Thyroid, a Chronic Fatigue comes from the inability of the cells to store energy and the loss of reserve energy as the Thyroid being responsible for metabolic rate in all people.

As you may imagine, a typical medical approach to such a shopping list of symptoms would be a general focus on symptom control. This is using pain medicines for pain, sleep medicines for sleep, antidepressants for mood tendencies and so on. Unfortunately all the symptoms and variations of a Thyroid problem are common and usually get labelled as individual medical conditions. The great misfortune is misdiagnoses that relates to the encounters found in orthodox medicine and that the medical approach is always reductionistic. That is, doctors tend to treat everything on your list and generally by the book for that matter much like any number of common or age related ailments.

The successful management and treatment, of Thyroid disease requires a sympathetic relationship between doctor, patient and particularly spouses. Doctors and friends who display the characteristics of empathy, acceptance of their patient and friend’s suffering, being non judgemental as well as commitment to continued care and support are more likely to maximise the effects of treatment and the general well being of all.

The longer the period of disease has existed, the more dysfunctional the entire system will have become by the time proper evaluation of the condition has been established and interrelated findings addressed. Where as a long standing autoimmune dysfunction could have been present for many years.

The better approach, is to take a holistic view to gain a wider understanding, that is to more clearly define the many interrelated symptoms and biochemical dysfunctions and imbalances that the body concomitantly expresses which limits the individual’s potential health and quality of life.

To arrive at a better and more holistic understanding, of an evaluated Thyroid condition, requires a detailed history and examination of related medical records and experiences acquired to date, including a close inquiring look at the results both positive and negative of any tests that may have been carried out conducive to treatment (therapies) that may have been provided.

The issue that emerges, as a particularly dominant theme for people with Thyroid conditions is the “Social Impact” relating to their illness. Sufferers generally speak in terms of issues faced in the social world and used their own experience as an illustration.

One thing that seems apparent, is that regardless of the condition, each person will have their own fine line to walk. This is an incredulous balancing act that is found very difficult to juggle day by day. For as the doctor feels he has just got the medication right, the patients anatomy undergoes some other curve ball effect only to be thrown off balance, hence resulting in oral medication not always hitting the mark. This is a quandary with which partners and society fail to understand, not to say that those with the Thyroid condition do either.

Meanwhile there is a real lack of community and personal understanding, of Thyroid conditions. The wider community does not appreciate that people with this chronic illness have difficulty filling the multiple social roles required of all members of the community. Because they have a life predominate of illness, they have to manage its effects, including the physical, psychological, psychosocial and medical. In reality some live with a fear of the future in which they could realistically become terminally ill. They may described their illnesses as “a sentence” in this case. Another reality is the challenge faced day to day by both Men and Women to get on top of living with a hormonal imbalance caused by their Thyroid condition. To coin the phrase ! “What you loose on the roller coaster you pick up on the merry go round”……. Illustrates the quality of life they have been deprived of and the constant contention they fight with to get it back.

In order to avoid living under other people’s perceptions, of what may be wrong with them, they feel the need to educate those around them to the fact that having a diagnosed chronic illness is not their priority in life……… but getting over it is. For some the complexity of a Thyroid condition and the underlying problems it causes can make explanation and education a frustrating burden, hence they tend not to bother others with the details.

Common conceptions of people with Thyroid conditions, are that they are un motivated, always sick’n tired and lazy, when in fact the opposite is more a realty and wanting to be part of the real world at any time is a major source of motivation. Often on good days or periods when trying to catch up with lost time, problems can occur by doing more than their metabolism will allow, to which usually equates to fatigue and heightened symptoms, so the cycle of feeling like “crap” (for want of a better word) keeps on keeping on.

Thyroid disease has no discrimination, with whom it affects and has a strong genetic predisposition. Usually, if you are going to get an Autoimmune Thyroid Disease (ATD) you are going to get it and possibly have it for a considerable period of time before it is properly identified and or diagnosed. Once again this is simply because the medical approach to the acquisition of symptoms is generally focused on symptom control.

The education and knowledge, to manage and better understand the experience of a Thyroid condition, is combined with making the appropriate life style concessions, by both the patient and those associated with them. Perhaps the best impact to all facets of daily existence and quality of life for all concerned, is through a supportive approach.

What is lost on the roller coaster is picked up on the merry go round provided there is an understanding to work at it.

It is no longer scientifically or morally justifiable, to argue whether Thyroid failure is “something” or “nothing.” What is clearly needed now are clean, randomised, prospective and adequately powered trials to provide unequivocal answers to the lingering but critical questions regarding the effects of Thyroid failure and its treatment on important end points such as intellectual function, ischemic heart disease, and quality of life, not to mention the “Social Impact of Thyroid Conditions”.
Could a long standing autoimmune dysfunction have been present for many years ?



end quote.

The effect of thyroid gland removal on the child google search (According to Dr Gale, there were “only” (if we are to believe his value judgement) cases of thyroid cancer cases due to Chernobyl. Let’s see if such trivialisation of suffering is warranted)

If Dr Gale proposed to me I should have my thyroid out, as if it were a tonsil, I would not be all that much impressed. No matter how skilled the surgeon was or how bountiful and reliable the supply of synthetic hormone replacement therapy was.

Dr. Gale, in the same situation might well be thrilled to bits, but personally I doubt it.

thryoid removal is not a “good thing”. No matter how quacks dress it up to be in order to save nuclear industry.

That’s just my opinion: thyroid removal is not something to look forward to.

I could be wrong. Even if GE and TEPCO paid for the hormone replacement therapy for the rest of my life, I would not be grateful.

Thanks, but no thanks Dr. Gale.

Dr Robert Gale does not “wish to trivialize these health effects…” but…

February 23, 2013

Letter to the Editor New York Times Jan 7 2013

“….Many experts predict relatively few radiation-related health consequences from Chernobyl (aside from about 7,000 cases of nonfatal thyroid cancer in children, which were mostly preventable if they had avoided contaminated milk), and even fewer from Fukushima.

We do not wish to trivialize these health effects, but, for example, the 80-year projected death rate from Chernobyl will likely be far less than the annual death rate from motor vehicle accidents in the United States. What is more important is the tremendous social, psychological and economic impact of these accidents. ….” Dr Robert Gale and Eric Lax.

Well, Dr Gale might not wish to trivialise the health effects, so I guess the publisher of his new book tied him to a stool and put a gun to his head.

Go rip your own thyroid out Dr Gale, and watch out for cars in America.

Only 7,000 thyroid cancers ? Tell me Dr Gale, should we congratulate those responsible? Of what relevance is a car crash in America to the average Ukrainian with thyroid nodules?

IN contrast to the public health policy espoused by Dr Gale, I repost the following:



The following is an abridged cut and paste from the above PBS Newshour (USA) website link.

GWEN IFILL: The nuclear crisis in Japan immediately brought back memories of the meltdown at Chernobyl, which still ranks as the world’s worst nuclear accident.
Nearly 25 years later, NewsHour science correspondent Miles O’Brien returned last week to see what life is like there now.
MILES O’BRIEN: For an infamous ghost town of epic proportions, Chernobyl sure is a busy place. Past the guards, through the gates, and into this time capsule of the life Soviet, you must first find your way to the exclusion zone office, where the phone does not stop ringing these days.
Marina Polyakova tells me it’s mostly reporters calling, wanting to visit since the meltdown at Fukushima.
What am I paying for here? What am I getting for 1,064?
WOMAN: That’s for the entrance.
MILES O’BRIEN: Paying the entrance fee, I remember many Ukrainians who would like to open the place to tourists, a macabre theme park, to be sure.
Do you think tourists would come here?
People can come to the area to see everything themselves and then make their own opinion, she told me, not on the basis of what journalists say about this place.
No offense taken, I guess. But what a difference 25 years can make.
MAN: The results were alarming. Significantly higher than normal levels were recorded.
MILES O’BRIEN: About 30 workers and firefighters died in the first week, untold numbers in the 25 years since.
GENNADI MILINEVSKY, University of Kiev: Very important to have these devices.
MILES O’BRIEN: My guide inside the Chernobyl exclusion zone was physicist Gennadi Milinevsky of the University of Kiev.
MILES O’BRIEN: Helicopters finally smothered the fire with sand, clay, boron, lead, and liquid nitrogen. Eventually, 600,000 Soviet army conscripts were dispatched to Chernobyl to shovel the lethal mess back into the remnants of the reactor, so that it could be encased in steel and concrete.
VASYL KAVATSIUK, Chernobyl liquidator: Our job was to put the radioactive material back…
VASYL KAVATSIUK: … to the reactor, yes.
MILES O’BRIEN: I see. So, then — so they could cover it over?
VASYL KAVATSIUK: That’s exactly right.
MILES O’BRIEN: So you — you were in very close proximity to this stuff?
VASYL KAVATSIUK: Cannot be closer.
MILES O’BRIEN: They called them liquidators. And Vasyl Kavatsiuk was one of them. A demolition expert, he spent 37 days working at the wrecked reactor.
VASYL KAVATSIUK: If you think about that, you are getting more sick more than you’re supposed to be. You are just thinking I have to do this. This is my job. I have to finish this. I have to do this. Anybody — anyhow, somebody must do that.
MILES O’BRIEN: Until he collapsed and had to be medevaced to Moscow. His wife, Maria, gave birth to a girl, Marta, in 1987. Just shy of her second birthday, she died suddenly of leukemia. In 1989, they had another daughter, Maria. She too contracted leukemia, but survived.
Is there a lot of cancer in your family?
VASYL KAVATSIUK: Never had one.
MILES O’BRIEN: Is there any doubt in your mind that the leukemia your two daughters had, had something to do with Chernobyl?
VASYL KAVATSIUK: I have no doubt about that.
MILES O’BRIEN: There’s no doubt radiation causes cancer and genetic defects. The fast-moving subatomic particles plow into molecules with enough energy to knock lose electrons. The dinged molecules, called ions, can kill or damage cells. Enough of this will kill you quickly. Less damage can cause cancer or, if DNA is the target, create genetic mutations.

This is the town of Pripyat.
MILES O’BRIEN: Pripyat was just one of 150 towns and settlements evacuated after the accident. More than 300,000 people were displaced, while a few hundred stubborn holdouts remain on their land, people like Maria, who, at 75, says she is more worried about her cottage falling down than radiation.
Children are the most vulnerable to the effects of radiation. After the explosion, there was a big spike in birth defects and thyroid cancer, extremely rare among children. And researchers say there is also a significant drop in the intellect in the region.

At the dilapidated regional hospital closest to Chernobyl, the medical staff is convinced there is a direct link between chronic exposure to radiation and a whole assortment of diseases and deformities.
I asked Dr. Constantine Cheres if he is convinced people are more sick here because of the Chernobyl accident. “Of course,” he told me. “Of course they are more sick.”

But the Chernobyl Forum, a group of U.N. agencies focused on the accident, estimates only 4,000 people died as a result of the explosion and its aftermath. One of the four members, the U.N. Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, issued a report contending: “There is no clearly demonstrated increase in the incidence of cancers or leukemia due to radiation in the exposed populations. Neither is there any proof of any non-malignant disorders that are related to ionizing radiation. However, there were widespread psychological reactions to the accident, which were due to fear of the radiation, not the actual radiation doses.”

But Ukrainian scientist Maryna Naboka begs to differ. She told me people here get sick more often and they become more seriously sick.

They receive little doses of radiation, but they do it on a day-to-day basis, and the second generation continues getting the radiation.

Radiation contamination is very stubborn. Gennadi Milinevsky took me to a place inside the exclusion zone, 30 kilometers, or 18 miles, around the plant, that is still heavily irradiated.
They call it the red forest because why?
GENNADI MILINEVSKY: They call it red forest because this is strong radiation. The leaves of trees became red.
It killed the trees.
The radiation killed pine trees in a 30-square kilometer, 11-square-mile swathe. As we hiked in, the Geiger counter got very excited.
All right, so now we’re more than — we’re at 400 times. Are we OK?
MILES O’BRIEN: Are we safe?
MILES O’BRIEN: All right. All right. Just checking. We just don’t want to stay here too long, do we?
GENNADI MILINEVSKY: Yes. If you put it on the ground…
GENNADI MILINEVSKY: … it became much…
MILES O’BRIEN: Oh, look at that, look at that, 5.5 half right there. That’s 500 times right there. This used to be pine trees as far as you can see.
MILES O’BRIEN: And the cesium came through here after the explosion. And that’s — and to this day is…
GENNADI MILINEVSKY: Yes, still over there.

MILES O’BRIEN: Are there animals that can live here, or not?

MILES O’BRIEN: Milinevsky’s colleague, Tim Mousseau, believes animals are the key to settling the debate over the long-term health effects of Chernobyl. He and his team have spent more than a decade studying birds in the Chernobyl region and beyond.
TIMOTHY MOUSSEAU, University of South Carolina: But it’s clear that this low-level contamination is — is probably more dangerous in the long run than — than having a single hot spot.
MILES O’BRIEN: In contaminated areas, there are half as many species and one-third number of birds you would expect. Their brains are smaller. Forty percent of male barn swallows have abnormal sperm. One in five have strange colored plumage that makes it hard to attract mates.
There are unusual beak deformities and large tumors that scientists have never seen before. What, if anything, can we extrapolate between that bird population, that population of barn swallows, and humans?
TIMOTHY MOUSSEAU: I would argue that, you know, we’re all — we’re all animals, and birds are actually more similar to us than dissimilar to us.
MILES O’BRIEN: Mousseau’s colleagues are also looking at Chernobyl’s grasshoppers. They frequently have asymmetrical wings, and fruit flies, which are easily impacted by radiation. Those found around Chernobyl have gray eyes, instead of red, and deformed wings.
Biologist Irina Koretsky studies the little bugs, in part because they only live about a month, meaning she can track genetic changes through many generations in short order. She worries about the sporadic funding for research that could lead to some definitive answers about the Chernobyl riddle.
She told me: “This is the worst thing that can happen. If there are gaps in the research for two or three years, we cannot have this full picture.”

At the remains of reactor number four, I saw the concrete and steel sarcophagus that was completed six months after the explosion.
Is it holding? Is it doing its job?
GENNADI MILINEVSKY: It’s not — not carefully doing this job, because there’s many holes inside and, still, in windy weather, we have some dust coming outside.
MILES O’BRIEN: Ukraine is asking the west for $800 million to pay for a new shelter over the old sarcophagus that would last 100 years. Beneath it is all is a molten witch’s brew of radioactive isotopes, including plutonium, with a half-life of 24,000 years, meaning, in 24,000 years, half of it will still be here, and 24,000 years later, half of that will still be here, and so on.
Do you think human beings are capable of keeping this thing safe for tens of thousands of years?
GENNADI MILINEVSKY: If he covers it, will try to keep it safe.
GENNADI MILINEVSKY: But this place, this area will be still not good for life.
GENNADI MILINEVSKY: Yes, forever, yes.
MILES O’BRIEN: And — and…
GENNADI MILINEVSKY: That is problem for all nuclear power plants. When we build new nuclear power, power plants, always, you create some headache for future generations.
MILES O’BRIEN: And something for our generation to consider as we weigh the pros and cons of nuclear power.

end quote

And in the context of the old comments and attitudes of the past, the culture of the Manhattan Project and the AEC, the attitudes expressed by UN sponsored forums and sections seem to be merely repeating a pattern of oversight, an ignorance of the suffering of individuals. The reality is an area is unsafe for life, for essentially forever. The host nation, Ukraine, cannot afford the $800million needed for an adequate sealing of the reactor. People continues to sicken and die prematurely and qualified doctors on the ground serving their affected communities dispute the UN findings and reports. There is a suffering due to the failure of a reactor, disease due to radiaiton and fear of the very international organisations the people of world pay for with some expectation of insight and knowledge. The cause for fear is not radiation but what outside organisations will do in order to isolate victims so as to maintain a false position regarding nuclear safety and the effects of radiaiton upon humans and other species.

Don’t let the appearance of open dissent and debate in these matters fool you. The reality of Chernobyl and Fukushima are only known to the people who actually suffer the consequences, and official propanda comparing car crashes wwith reactor explosions is just that.

Over arching all of this is the secrecy provisions of the Atomic Energy Act and each country’s equivalent suppression laws. The nuclear world is not really a democratic one.

Reactor accident, ha, says Dr Gale. Car crashes are worse.

Um, but both do happen. Its inevitable. Dont subtract one from the other, add them both up.

America, in that regard, is a lot more vulnerable in that regard. Both can happen. It’s not either or.

The obvious and admitted outcome of Chernobyl is the sudden decpreciation of the value of a child’s thyroid gland in the view of nuclear advocates such as Doctor Gale.

Go get a job with Occidental Petroleum Dr Gale.

People doing it for themselves. World Network for Saving Children from Radiation

February 23, 2013

Fukushima report Vol.2: Preparing for Fukushima-based clinic

Fukushima · Children · 1-10September2012

A few members of the Fukushima Network and volunteer doctors have been preparing for the establishment of a Fukushima-based clinic. The fund-raising committee for building the clinic kicked off in January 2012 in order to check the health condition of children who decided to stay inside of Fukushima after the nuclear disaster. The clinic will cover pediatrics, internal medicine, psychosomatic medicine and cancer treatment.

On September 1 a provisional consultation day took place at 2 different sites in Fukushima, at Miyashiro Temporary Housing Area for the refugees from the villages near the power plants and at an office near Fukushima Station.

Miyashiro Temporary Housing Area, located in the northern part of Fukushima City, is utilized mainly by elderly residents who evacuated from Namie Town (20km away from the Fukushima Daiichi NPP). According to the doctor from Fukushima Clinic, the consultation was held not only to examine the symptoms of these patients, but to hear the residents’ concerns and difficulties of living in temporary houses. In the consultation, most of the residents confessed that they had moved through at least 6 different refuges before they arrived at Miyashiro temporal houses. Due to the stress caused by the drastic changes in the environments surrounding the elderly residents, many of them had faced the deterioration of their health or the emergence of symptoms they never experienced, including insomnia, cough, high blood pressure and hives. Almost all of the patients reported extreme anxiety and uncertainty regarding their future, due to uncomfortable housing conditions and the instability they have been experiencing since the nuclear disaster.

Another consultation was held at an office near Fukushima Station, organised mainly for the children. The main concern of the Fukushima mothers is the condition of the thyroid glands of their children. Ultrasound thyroid gland function testing was conducted by the Fukushima local government beginning in May. However, the results of the testing were not shared with the general public nor were individual results shared with the Fukushima parents even after the test. Most of the parents visiting the Fukushima Clinic asked the doctors for second opinions regarding the results of their children’s thyroid gland function test. These doctors are concerned that the thyroid gland data from Fukushima children was collected only for academic study and experiment, not for protecting the children from the emergence of thyroid cancer.

What’s New
Saturday, February 23, 2013

Fukushima: the CNRS does not tell the truth and indoctrinates the masses
Friday, February 22, 2013

National Students’ Summit to take place in Fukushima this summer
Thursday, February 21, 2013

Three children found to have thyroid cancer; seven have suspected malignancy, but none of these cases are attributed to the nuclear accident

Why I myself cannot evacuate, a father in Fukushima confesses
Wednesday, February 20, 2013

Urgent Questions in Upper House of Parliament on Newly Passed Child Victim Support Law.

end quote. I suppose the government has gagged itself and cannot help. Given the laws that suckle the polluters while the health of many is poisoned.

The least the ignorant authorities can do if they cant lend a hand is shut the F up while people do it for themselves.

The Laws Against Full & Open disclosure of the facts

February 23, 2013

Atomic Energy Act of 1954 as amended, current NRC cornerstone legislation.

Chapter 2–Definitions
Sec. 11

aa. The term “special nuclear material” means (1) plutonium, uranium enriched in the isotope 233 or in the isotope 235, and any other materialwhich the Commission, pursuant to the provisions of section 51, determines to be special nuclear material, but does not include source material; or (2) any material artificially enriched by any of the foregoing, but does not include source material.

The term “United States” when used in a geographical sense
includes all territories and possessions of the United States, the Canal Zone and Puerto Rico.


y. The term “restricted data” means all data concerning (1) design,manufacture, or utilization of atomic weapons; (2) the production of special nuclear material; or (3) the use of special nuclear material in the production of energy, but shall not include data declassified or removed from the Restricted Data category pursuant to section 142″

The Atomic Energy Act 1954 as currently amended and operational as a cornstone legislation governing NRC and its public disclosures. How the government and industry hides between the legs of the military industrial complex law.

People have to discover for themselves what nuclear authorities around the world hide. The public disclosure of the facts will not come from authorities. Its against the law.

The amount of “special nuclear material” in Japanese children’s urine, was, as we saw in the video on the previous page, (and on the bottom of this one) enough to make fully grown flee in horror from mums and dads and babies.

With the parents chasing them.

So the parents are doing it for themselves. More later.

Never has an industry made such a balls up as nuclear has even as it hides behind a law forbidding full and open disclosure.

Like the skin of Australian Aboriginal people, burnt by fallout -who were denied any testing or diagnosis at the time – the bodies of the babies of Japan contain substances subject to the Secrecy Laws of the State.

Restricted Data.

In the vacuum of knowledge, the authorities inject any half truth or diversion they wish, so they think.

At the moment they are engaged in Operation Backpedal. People are doing it for themselves. Finding out. Despite the empty threats from the Japanese authorities and the empty insults those miscreants hurl at the population through the gutter press.

What is the big about a urine test? The secrecy laws which protects the industry. While the industry knows, the mothers are left guessing.

The industry/government conglomerate (the nuclear slum) responds to anyone trying to ascertain the truth a panic merchant.

When in fact, as with Titterton and the Safety Committee in Australia, the uncertainty is caused by a willful government bent upon maintaining public ignjorance. In order to uphold its immoral law.

Page 22 of the Atomic Energy Act enshrines in law the link between nuclear weapons and nuclear reactors. The secrecy provisions regarding “special nuclear materials” as used by nuclear reactors further shows that these installations are dual use, and are located adjacent to civilians. Trapped like sitting ducks. When special nuclear material spreads from a cracked reactor, what are the people told?

See also:
Unclassified Controlled
Nuclear Information (UCNI)

How not to defend democracy.

The long road to full and open disclosure post Fukushima – Japanese people do it on their own.

February 23, 2013

Despite the billions taxpayers have paid world nuclear industry since 1939, telling the whole truth and nothinhg but the truth remains alien to it.

For that very openness is forbidden to it under the law of various lands, and the prototype is the current US Atomic Energy Act, as amended, from 1954.

So, the people in Japan quickly realised that they would have to do it for themselves.

And they are.

From the moment mothers had to plead in vain for health officials to test their children’s urine in March 2011, with the officials high tailing it down an elevator, no doubt in a hurry to move their own kids to cleaner air, the official grip on secret data stolen from the victims of the disaster was on a very short leash.

So things are happening.
Last Modified: 18 Aug 2011 14:09

Fukushima radiation alarms doctors
Japanese doctors warn of public health problems caused by Fukushima radiation.

Scientists and doctors are calling for a new national policy in Japan that mandates the testing of food, soil, water, and the air for radioactivity still being emitted from Fukushima’s heavily damaged Daiichi nuclear power plant.

“How much radioactive materials have been released from the plant?” asked Dr Tatsuhiko Kodama, a professor at the Research Centre for Advanced Science and Technology and Director of the University of Tokyo’s Radioisotope Centre, in a July 27 speech to the Committee of Health, Labour and Welfare at Japan’s House of Representatives.

“The government and TEPCO have not reported the total amount of the released radioactivity yet,” said Kodama, who believes things are far worse than even the recent detection of extremely high radiation levels at the plant.

There is widespread concern in Japan about a general lack of government monitoring for radiation, which has caused people to begin their own independent monitoring, which are also finding disturbingly high levels of radiation.

Kodama’s centre, using 27 facilities to measure radiation across the country, has been closely monitoring the situation at Fukushima – and their findings are alarming.

According to Dr Kodama, the total amount of radiation released over a period of more than five months from the ongoing Fukushima nuclear disaster is the equivalent to more than 29 “Hiroshima-type atomic bombs” and the amount of uranium released “is equivalent to 20” Hiroshima bombs.

Kodama, along with other scientists, is concerned about the ongoing crisis resulting from the Fukushima situation, as well as what he believes to be inadequate government reaction, and believes the government needs to begin a large-scale response in order to begin decontaminating affected areas.

Distrust of the Japanese government’s response to the nuclear disaster is now common among people living in the effected prefectures, and people are concerned about their health.

Recent readings taken at the plant are alarming.

When on August 2nd readings of 10,000 millisieverts (10 sieverts) of radioactivity per hour were detected at the plant, Japan’s science ministry said that level of dose is fatal to humans, and is enough radiation to kill a person within one to two weeks after the exposure.

10,000 millisieverts (mSv) is the equivalent of approximately 100,000 chest x-rays.

It is an amount 250 per cent higher than levels recorded at the plant in March after it was heavily damaged by the earthquake and ensuing tsunami.

The operator of Japan’s crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), that took the reading, used equipment to measure radiation from a distance, and was unable to ascertain the exact level because the device’s maximum reading is only 10,000 mSv.

TEPCO also detected 1,000 millisieverts (mSv) per hour in debris outside the plant, as well as finding 4,000 mSv per hour inside one of the reactor buildings.

The Fukushima disaster has been rated as a “level seven” on the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale (INES). This level, the highest, is the same as the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in 1986, and is defined by the scale as: “[A] major release of radioactive material with widespread health and environmental effects requiring implementation of planned and extended countermeasures.”

The Fukushima and Chernobyl disasters are the only nuclear accidents to have been rated level seven on the scale, which is intended to be logarithmic, similar to the scale used to describe the comparative magnitude of earthquakes. Each increasing level represents an accident approximately ten times more severe than the previous level.

Doctors in Japan are already treating patients suffering health effects they attribute to radiation from the ongoing nuclear disaster.

“We have begun to see increased nosebleeds, stubborn cases of diarrhoea, and flu-like symptoms in children,” Dr Yuko Yanagisawa, a physician at Funabashi Futawa Hospital in Chiba Prefecture, told Al Jazeera.

She attributes the symptoms to radiation exposure, and added: “We are encountering new situations we cannot explain with the body of knowledge we have relied upon up until now.”

“The situation at the Daiichi Nuclear facility in Fukushima has not yet been fully stabilised, and we can’t yet see an end in sight,” Yanagisawa said. “Because the nuclear material has not yet been encapsulated, radiation continues to stream into the environment.”

Health concerns

Al Jazeera’s Aela Callan, reporting from Japan’s Ibaraki prefecture, said of the recently detected high radiation readings: “It is now looking more likely that this area has been this radioactive since the earthquake and tsunami, but no one realised until now.”

Workers at Fukushima are only allowed to be exposed to 250 mSv of ionising radiation per year.

Junichi Matsumoto, a TEPCO spokesman, said the high dose was discovered in an area that does not hamper recovery efforts at the stricken plant.

Yet radioactive cesium exceeding the government limit was detected in processed tea made in Tochigi City, about 160km from the troubled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, according to the Tochigi Prefectural Government, who said radioactive cesium was detected in tea processed from leaves harvested in the city in early July.

The level is more than 3 times the provisional government limit.

Yanagisawa’s hospital is located approximately 200km from Fukushima, so the health problems she is seeing that she attributes to radiation exposure causes her to be concerned by what she believes to be a grossly inadequate response from the government.

From her perspective, the only thing the government has done is to, on April 25, raise the acceptable radiation exposure limit for children from 1 mSv/year to 20 mSv/year.

“This has caused controversy, from the medical point of view,” Yanagisawa told Al Jazeera. “This is certainly an issue that involves both personal internal exposures as well as low-dose exposures.”

Junichi Sato, Greenpeace Japan Executive Director, said: “It is utterly outrageous to raise the exposure levels for children to twenty times the maximum limit for adults.”

“The Japanese government cannot simply increase safety limits for the sake of political convenience or to give the impression of normality.”

Authoritative current estimates of the health effects of low-dose ionizing radiation are published in the Biological Effects of Ionising Radiation VII (BEIR VII) report from the US National Academy of Sciences.

The report reflects the substantial weight of scientific evidence proving there is no exposure to ionizing radiation that is risk-free….. end quote